Skip to page content
Office of Workers' Compensation Programs
Bookmark and Share

Division of Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation (DEEOIC)

On This Page

Final Adjudication Branch

Below are the head notes for the FAB decisions and orders relating to the topic heading, Final Adjudication Branch. The head notes are grouped under the following subheadings: Discretion of, Effect of Directorís determination, FAB as finder of fact, Hearings before, Objections to a recommended decision, Reconsideration before, Subpoenas, and Time limit for issuance of final decision. To view a particular decision or order in its entirety, click on the hyperlink for that decision or order at the end of the head note.

Discretion of


Effect of Directorís determination


FAB as finder of fact

  • Claimants submitted evidence at a hearing to substantiate their allegation that their father began working at the Bethlehem Steel facility during the time period during which weapons-related production occurred at that facility. However, FAB concluded that Social Security Administration records, information submitted by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, employment records and medical certification cards were persuasive and established that the worker did not begin working at that facility until September 1953, which was after the covered period. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 20150209-20000973-2 (Depít of Labor, September 23, 2015).


Hearings before


Objections to a recommended decision


Reconsideration before


Subpoenas

  • A request for the issuance of a subpoena must be in writing and sent to FAB no later than 30 days after the date of the original hearing request. FAB denied claimantís request in this case on the ground that it was untimely. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 20140710-84623-2 (Depít of Labor, March 19, 2015).
  • FAB issued a written preliminary denial of claimantís subpoena request for the production of documents, on the ground that it was untimely. As part of that preliminary denial, FAB notified the worker that the issue of the subpoena request would be addressed again in the final decision on his Part B claim. When the claimant thereafter requested that FAB reconsider his preliminary denial of the subpoena request, FAB informed him that reconsideration of the preliminary denial was not available, and reminded him that the denial of his request would be addressed in the final decision. FAB concluded in the final decision that the preliminary denial was correctly denied because it was clearly untimely. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 20140710-84623-2 (Depít of Labor, March 19, 2015).
  • FAB informed claimant that he had to explain why requested documents were relevant to his claim, and also show that a subpoena was the only way to obtain such documents. However, claimantís timely, written request that FAB issue a subpoena for documents relating to his Part B claim was denied because he did not satisfy these requirements. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 20130111-12000242-2 (Depít of Labor, June 13, 2013).
  • FAB has no authority to issue subpoenas in connection a hearing on a claim filed under Part E. The statute only grants DEEOIC the authority to issue subpoenas in connection with claims filed under Part B. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 20130111-12000242-2 (Depít of Labor, June 13, 2013).


Time limit for issuance of final decision