Printing - FECA-PT2 - National Association of Letter Carriers

j. Developing Factors of Employment. An employee who claims to have had an emotional
reaction to conditions of employment must identify those conditions. The CE must carefully
develop and analyze the identified employment incidents to determine whether or not they in fact
occurred and if they occurred whether they constitute factors of the employment. When an
incident or incidents are the alleged cause of disability, the CE must obtain from the claimant,
agency personnel and others, such as witnesses to the incident, a statement relating in detail
exactly what was said and done. If any of the statements are vague or lacking detail, the
responsible person should be requested to submit a supplemental statement clarifying the meaning
or correcting the omission.
When all available evidence has been obtained, the CE must prepare an objective and neutral
account of the facts (Statement of Accepted Facts, or SOAF). Where the evidence is in conflict, the
CE must decide which is the best supported and most likely version. The CE must distinguish in
the SOAF between those activities and circumstances which are factors of employment and those
which are not (see PM Chapter 2-809.13c). The evaluating physician will be required to give a
rationalized opinion specifying which activities and circumstances, as set forth in the statement of
accepted facts, caused or contributed to the condition found on examination.
The determining factor in the types of cases discussed in this section is whether the alleged
disability resulted from an incident or incidents which are sufficiently connected to the employment
to be considered factors of the employment. To make this determination, the CE must fully
develop the circumstances of the alleged injury as well as the employee's duties and working
conditions. This will include not only those duties specifically defined (official position description)
but also implied (not specifically defined but expected by the employing establishment), if any.
Where a claim is filed because of an incident which appears to have no direct relationship to an
employee's regular or specially assigned duties, the CE must decide whether a requirement
imposed by the employment was involved that, under the circumstances, would be considered part
of the employment.
Claims filed for injury or illness allegedly due to employing establishment actions against or
relating to an employee solely because of willful misconduct, failure to conform to or violation of
official agency procedures, or an employee's actions as a private citizen, do not have the coverage
of the Act because the injury or illness does not result from the employee's regular or special
duties or a requirement imposed by the employment. These situations are not the result of work
performance, but of a type of behavior which removes the employee from the performance of duty.
Claims filed for emotional reactions to personnel actions such as performance evaluations and
administration of leave also do not have the coverage of the Act. Where the evidence, after proper
development, shows the existence of any of the described situations, and requirements for time,
civil employee and fact of injury have been met, the claim will be denied for failure to meet the
performance of duty requirement.
CEs must become familiar with significant Board decisions in this area and apply the established
precedents to new cases. In addition to the cases cited above, CEs should note Carol Medlinger, 29
ECAB 168, and Kenneth Vreeland, 12 ECAB 281.
k. Rescission. In some claims, factors which were originally accepted as work-related would
FECA-PT2 Printed: 06/08/2010 206