A.D. and Department of the Air Force, Tinker Air Force Base (Board decision, March 9, 2026)

ECAB final decision. The Board affirmed OWCP's June 18, 2025 denial of continuation of pay because the worker filed Form CA-1 more than 30 days after the injury. The order does not decide eligibility for other compensation benefits. 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

An Air Force inventory specialist was injured in a work-related vehicle accident on February 27, 2025. OWCP accepted sprains of her shoulder, neck, and upper back but denied continuation of pay. The Board found that the required Form CA-1 was filed on April 2, more than 30 days after the accident, despite the worker's account that she had started the online process in March. It upheld the continuation-of-pay denial while leaving other compensation benefits unaffected by this ruling.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. §§ 8118(a) and 8122(a)(2); 20 C.F.R. § 10.205(a).
• Outcome: Continuation of pay denied; accepted injury and other benefit questions unaffected.
• Key point: Filing Form CA-1 within 30 days of the injury is required for continuation of pay.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
A.D., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 26-0146
)
Issued: March 9, 2026
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, TINKER )
AIR FORCE BASE, OK, Employer
)
__________ )

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

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:
PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge
VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On December 3, 2025 appellant filed a timely appeal from a June 18, 2025 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). Pursuant to the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act1 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board has jurisdiction over the merits of this case.2

ISSUE

The issue is whether appellant has met her burden of proof to establish entitlement to continuation of pay (COP).

1
5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2
The Board notes that, following the June 18, 2025 decision, OWCP received additional evidence. The Board’s Rules of Procedure provides: “The Board’s review of a case is limited to the evidence in the case record that was before OWCP at the time of its final decision. Evidence not before OWCP will not be considered by the Board for the first time on appeal.” 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(1). Thus, the Board is precluded from reviewing this additional evidence for the first time on appeal. Id.
FACTUAL HISTORY

On April 2, 2025 appellant, then a 50-year-old inventory management specialist, filed a traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on February 27, 2025 she injured her right shoulder and chest area when she was involved in a motor vehicle accident while in the performance of duty. She stopped work on the date of injury and returned to work on February 28, 2025.

In an April 11, 2025 development letter, OWCP informed appellant of the deficiencies of her claim for COP. It advised her of the type of evidence required and afforded her 60 days to submit the necessary evidence.

In a May 20, 2025 response to OWCP’s April 11, 2025 letter, appellant stated that she received notification from the Employees’ Compensation Operations and Management Portal (ECOMP) on March 27, 2025 indicating that her identity had been verified. On June 9, 2025 she noted that her “CA-1 was initiated [March 27, 2025].”

By decision dated June 18, 2025, OWCP accepted the claim for sprains of the right shoulder joint, cervical spine, and thoracic spine.

By separate decision also dated June 18, 2025, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for COP, finding that she had not reported her injury on an OWCP-approved form within 30 days of her February 27, 2025 employment injury. It further noted that the decision affected only her entitlement to COP and did not affect her entitlement to other compensation benefits.

LEGAL PRECEDENT

Section 8118(a) of FECA authorizes COP, not to exceed 45 days, to an employee who has filed a claim for a period of wage loss due to a traumatic injury with his or her immediate superior on a form approved by the Secretary of Labor within the time specified in section 8122(a)(2) of this title.3 This latter section provides that written notice of injury shall be given within 30 days.4 The context of section 8122 makes clear that this means within 30 days of the injury.5

OWCP’s regulations provide, in pertinent part, that to be eligible for COP, an employee must: (1) have a traumatic injury which is job related and the cause of the disability and/or the cause of lost time due to the need for medical examination and treatment; (2) file Form CA-1 within 30 days of the date of the injury; and (3) begin losing time from work due to the traumatic injury within 45 days of the injury.6

3
Supra note 1 at § 8118(a).
4
Id. at § 8122(a)(2).
5
E.M., Docket No. 20-0837 (issued January 27, 2021); J.S., Docket No. 18-1086 (issued January 17, 2019); Robert M. Kimzey, 40 ECAB 762, 763-64 (1989); Myra Lenburg, 36 ECAB 487, 489 (1985). 6 20 C.F.R. § 10.205(a)(1-3); see also T.S., Docket No. 19-1228 (issued December 9, 2019); J.M., Docket No. 09- 1563 (issued February 26, 2010); Dodge Osborne, 44 ECAB 849 (1993); William E. Ostertag, 33 ECAB 1925 (1982).

2
ANALYSIS

The Board finds that appellant has not met her burden of proof to establish entitlement to COP.

On April 2, 2025 appellant filed written notice of her February 27, 2025 traumatic injury on a Form CA-1. As noted above, to be eligible for COP, a claimant must file a Form CA-1 within 30 days of the date of injury.7 Because appellant filed her Form CA-1 on April 2, 2025, more than 30 days after the February 27, 2025 date of injury, the Board finds that she has not met her burden of proof.

Appellant may submit new evidence or argument with a written request for reconsideration to OWCP within one year of this merit decision, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8128(a) and 20 C.F.R.
§§ 10.605 through 10.607.

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that appellant has not met her burden of proof to establish entitlement to COP.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the June 18, 2025 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: March 9, 2026
Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

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

7
Id. See also A.B., Docket No. 25-0205 (issued January 28, 2025).

3