N.H. and U.S. Postal Service, Suitland Post Office (Board decision, March 19, 2025)

ECAB final decision. The Board affirmed OWCP's denial of an oral-hearing request as untimely. A party may petition the Board for reconsideration within 30 days of issuance unless this order specifies another period, under 20 C.F.R. § 501.7(a). FECA compensation decisions are generally not subject to court review under 5 U.S.C. § 8128(b).

Plain-English summary

A postal city carrier asked for an oral hearing concerning an earlier injury decision. The Board found the request was filed after the applicable deadline. It upheld OWCP's refusal to grant the hearing.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Federal Employees' Compensation Act, 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
• Outcome: Oral-hearing request denied as untimely.
• Key point: The hearing request missed the statutory filing period.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
N.H., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 25-0281
)
Issued: March 19, 2025
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, SUITLAND POST )
OFFICE, Suitland, MD, Employer
)
__________ )

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record
Appellant, pro se
Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:
ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge
JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge
VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On January 30, 2025 appellant filed a timely appeal from a December 10, 2024 nonmerit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). 1 As more than 180 days elapsed from the last merit decision, dated January 17, 2023, to the filing of this appeal, pursuant to the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act2 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board lacks jurisdiction to review the merits of this case.

1
Appellant submitted a timely request for oral argument before the Board. 20 C.F.R. § 501.5(b). Pursuant to the Board’s Rules of Procedure, oral argument may be held in the discretion of the Board. 20 C.F.R. § 501.5(a). In support of appellant’s oral argument request, appellant asserted that he was not paid as he was dealing with this case. The Board, in exercising its discretion, denies appellant’s request for oral argument because the Board lacks jurisdiction to review the merits of this case. Oral argument in this appeal would further delay issuance of a Board decision and not serve a useful purpose. As such, the oral argument request is denied, and this decision is based on the case record as submitted to the Board. 2 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
ISSUE

The issue is whether OWCP properly denied appellant’s request for an oral hearing as untimely filed, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8124(b).

FACTUAL HISTORY

On March 23, 2022 appellant, then a 30-year-old city carrier, filed a traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on March 17, 2022 he sustained forearm, elbow, hip, and shoulder pain when he slipped down a hill due to rain while in the performance of duty. He stopped work on March 17, 2022, and returned to part-time modified duty on April 6, 2022, and full-time regular duty on January 30, 2023. OWCP accepted appellant’s claim for right arm strain of muscle, fascia, and tendon(s) at the shoulder and upper arm level.

On June 29, 2022 appellant filed a claim for compensation (Form CA-7) for disability during the period May 2 through 11, 2022.

By decision dated July 26, 2022, OWCP denied appellant’s disability claim, finding that he had not established disability from work during the claimed period causally related to the accepted employment injury.

On November 23, 2022 OWCP issued a notice of proposed termination of appellant’s wage-loss compensation and medical benefits, finding that the weight of the medical evidence established that he no longer had any residuals or disability from work due to his accepted work- related injury. It afforded him 30 days to submit additional evidence or argument.

By decision dated January 17, 2023, OWCP finalized the proposed termination of appellant’s wage-loss compensation and medical benefits, effective on that date.

By appeal request form postmarked November 26, 2024, appellant requested an oral hearing before a representative of OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review from the decision dated July 26, 2022.

By decision dated December 10, 2024, OWCP denied appellant’s request for an oral hearing, finding that it was untimely filed. It further exercised its discretion and determined that the issue in the case could equally well be addressed through a request for reconsideration before OWCP along with the submission of new evidence supporting that he was entitled to wage-loss compensation for the period beginning May 2, 2022 causally related to the accepted employment injury.

LEGAL PRECEDENT

Section 8124(b)(1) of FECA provides that “a claimant for compensation not satisfied with a decision of the Secretary is entitled, on request made within 30 days after the date of the issuance of the decision, to a hearing on his [or her] claim before a representative of the Secretary.”3 Sections 10.617 and 10.618 of the federal regulations implementing this section of FECA provide 3 Supra note 2 at § 8124(b)(1).

2 that a claimant shall be afforded a choice of an oral hearing, or a review of the written record by a representative of the Secretary. 4 A claimant is entitled to an oral hearing or review of the written record as a matter of right only if the request is filed within the requisite 30 days as determined by postmark or other carrier’s date marking, or the date received in the Employees’ Compensation Operations and Management Portal (ECOMP), and before the claimant has requested reconsideration. 5 Although there is no right to a review of the written record or an oral hearing, if not requested within the 30-day time period, OWCP may within its discretionary powers grant or deny appellant’s request and must exercise its discretion. 6

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that OWCP properly denied appellant’s request for an oral hearing as untimely filed, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8124(b).

OWCP’s regulations provide that a request for oral hearing or review of the written record must be made within 30 days of the decision for which review is sought. The 30th day following OWCP’s July 26, 2022 decision was August 25, 2022. As appellant’s request for an oral hearing was postmarked November 26, 2024, the request was made more than 30 days after OWCP’s July 26, 2022 decision and was therefore untimely. Section 8124(b)(1) is unequivocal on the time limitation for filing a request for a hearing or review of the written record. 7 As such, appellant was not entitled to an oral hearing as a matter of right. 8

OWCP also has the discretionary power to grant an oral hearing or review of the written record even if the claimant is not entitled to a review as a matter of right. 9 The Board finds that OWCP, in its December 10, 2024 decision, properly exercised its discretion noting that it had determined that the issue could be equally well addressed through a request for reconsideration before OWCP and submitting evidence not previously considered .

The Board has held that the only limitation on OWCP’s authority is reasonableness. An abuse of discretion is generally shown through proof of manifest error, clearly unreasonable exercise of judgment, or actions taken which are contrary to both logic and probable deduction from established facts. 10 Herein, the evidence of record does not establish that OWCP abused its discretion in denying appellant’s request for an oral hearing. Accordingly, the Board finds that

4
20 C.F.R. §§ 10.616, 10.617.
5
Id. at § 10.616(a); Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, Hearings and Reviews of the Written Record, Chapter 2.1601.4a (February 2024). 6 See P.G., Docket No. 24-0447 (issued August 12, 2024); W.H., Docket No. 20-0562 (issued August 6, 2020); Eddie Franklin, 51 ECAB 223 (1999); Delmont L. Thompson, 51 ECAB 155 (1999). 7 See M.M., Docket No. 19-1171 (issued October 22, 2019); William F. Osborne, 46 ECAB 198 (1994).
8
See D.S., Docket No. 19-1764 (issued March 13, 2020).
9
Supra note 7.
10
See T.G., Docket No. 19-0904 (issued November 25, 2019); Daniel J. Perea, 42 ECAB 214, 221 (1990).

3
OWCP properly denied appellant’s request for an oral hearing as untimely filed, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8124(b).11

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that OWCP properly denied appellant’s request for an oral hearing as untimely filed, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8124(b).

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the December 10, 2024 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: March 19, 2025
Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

11
See C.G., Docket No. 25-0053 (issued December 12, 2024); C.H., Docket No. 20-0540 (issued December 1, 2020).

4