Chapter E-300 Initial Development

1. Purpose and Scope. This chapter contains the procedures to be used by the claims examiner (CE), for the review and initial development of a Part B claim, a Part E claim, a Part B/E claim, and for a Part D claim that has been developed by the Department of Energy (DOE), after it has been reviewed by the designated DO employee and entered in ECMS (Please refer to Chapter E-200 Case Creation). This chapter supplements the instructions provided in Chapter 2-0100 Developing Factual Evidence.

2. Resource Center Actions. Resource Center (RC) staff conducts initial employment verification on most non-RECA claims filed in the RC and occupational history development on all new Part E claims with covered employment and eligible survivors. The DO only conducts initial employment verification on claims filed directly with the DO or when claim forms are received at the RC unaccompanied by an EE-3 form. Prior to conducting initial development, the CE must review the case file to determine RC involvement. The RC prepares a memorandum outlining all actions taken and forwards all claim forms and associated documentation with a New Claim Check List (See Chapter E-400) to the DO. The CE reviews the memo and all materials and determines what additional development actions are required based upon RC findings.

a. Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE). The RC has access to the ORISE database and performs an initial search, where applicable, to verify employment. The RC prints all ORISE search results and forwards them with the newly filed claim forms to the DO with a memorandum and New Claim Check List. In certain instances the ORISE printout can be used to confirm employment.

b. Employment Verification Response. The RC generates the EE-5 (or preferred method of request) to DOE and/or the corporate verifiers per the procedures set out in chapter E-400 and requests the verification response be directed to the adjudicatory DO.

(1) Employment Verification Point of Contact (POC). Each DO DD appoints an employment verification POC to serve as a clearinghouse for all employment verification request responses. The RC places the POC contact information for each respective office on the request. A general email account exists for each DO POC for incoming responses via email. Once the response is received in the DO, the POC reviews ECMS and forwards the documentation to the appropriate CE.

c. No RC Development Conducted. In instances where the RC was unable to identify a proper verifying entity, or the surviving claimants are clearly not eligible (Part E adult children), the DO CE reviews the employment evidence to determine if employment development steps are necessary.

d. Coding RC Actions. In cases where the claim was filed at the RC and the RC undertook development actions prior to case create, the CE ensures that ECMS coding corresponds with RC dates of action. No coding is done at the RC, so the CE must ensure proper coding upon review after case create. The RC prepares a memorandum accompanying all submissions of claim materials to the DO for case create. The memos chronologically outline RC actions. The CE reviews the memo and inputs the proper coding into ECMS to correspond with the date of occurrence in the RC. Since the CE is coding for actions that occurred prior to case create, the “UN” code is deleted in accordance with the discussion outlined in Chapter E-400.

(1) Enter Correct ORISE Date. The RC accesses the ORISE database to verify employment. The DO CE enters the "OR" claim status code to correspond with the date on which the ORISE search took place at the RC. The ECMS status effective date is the date the RC searched ORISE.

(2) Employment Verification Coding. Based on the documentation received from the RC, the CE enters the "ES” and/or "CS" claim status code(s) into ECMS, with a status effective date of the date on which such action(s) was taken in the RC. If the CE enters an “ES”, he/she then enters the appropriate reason code from the drop down menu, which includes the Operations Center and that an EE-5 was sent [ie. “AL5 – Albuquerque Operations Office (EE-5)”]

(3). Occupational History Development Coding. In cases where the RC submits completed occupational history development materials, the CE enters the "DO" claim status code, and selects the reason code "OH - Occupational History" into ECMS with a status effective date of the date on which the occupational history questionnaire was completed by the RC as noted on the RC memo to the DO. If the occupational history questionnaire (OHQ) is received at the DO prior to the claim filing date, see Chapter E-400.10.f.

3. Review for Potential Development. Regardless of the type of claim (i.e. B only, E only, B and E, or a Part D claim developed by the DOE), the CE first reviews the claim to determine what development is required in order to issue a recommended decision. The CE needs to review the following three factors to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to establish a claim. The three factors are common claim elements that need to be addressed prior to issuing a recommended decision, and are applied differently for each claim type.

a. Medical Condition(s).

b. Employment History. Information provided by the RC will assist the CE in determining what additional development is required.

c. Survivorship Eligibility, When Appropriate.

4. Reviewing a New Claim. As noted above, upon receipt of a new claim filed at the RC, the CE closely reviews all initial development actions taken at the RC and determines what follow-up measures are necessary. The information contained in the RC packet assists the CE in planning additional development steps. This initial review takes place upon receipt of the new claim from the CCC as outlined in Chapter E-200. The CE reviews the claim as a whole, weighing employment, illness, and survivorship to properly categorize the claim and determine what development is required.

a. The CE reviews the claimed medical condition(s) on the EE-1/2 form(s) and the completed Case Create Worksheet to verify whether the claim is applicable under Part B or Part E of the EEOICPA or both. For example, the claimed condition of prostate cancer is applicable under both Part B and Part E but the claimed condition of asbestosis is only applicable under Part E. For the covered occupational illnesses under Part B of the EEOICPA, the CE refers to Chapters 2-0600, 2-0700, and 2-0800 for the Eligibility Criteria for Cancer, Beryllium Illness, and Silicosis, respectively. For the covered illnesses under Part E of the EEOICPA, the CE refers to the Chapter E-500 Evidentiary Requirements for Causation.

(1) The CE must ensure that the condition claimed is covered under Part B, Part E, or both, based upon the claimed employment and the different criteria used to determine covered employment under each respective Part.

(2) The CE develops the medical condition(s), as needed, in accordance with Chapter 2-0100 Developing Factual Evidence.

b. Simultaneously, the CE reviews the EE-3 form and any employment verification request forms or evidence received from the RC to determine whether the claimed employment is applicable under Part B or Part E of the EEOICPA or both. The CE specifically looks at the claimed facility types(s) (i.e. DOE, AWE, BV, and covered RECA mines or mills), time period(s), and job title(s), and ORISE print outs, if available.

(1) Under Part B of the EEOICPA the applicable facility types include DOE, AWE, beryllium vendors (BV), and Section 5 RECA mines or mills. AWE subcontractors are not covered under Part B or Part E.

(2) Under Part E of the EEOICPA the only applicable facility type is DOE or a Section 5 RECA mine or mill. In addition, certain individuals covered under Section 4 of the RECA who were on-site participants during certain atmospheric atomic weapons tests are also potentially covered under Part E. Only DOE contractors/subcontractors are covered, as federal DOE employees at such sites are not covered Part E employees.

(a) DOE Remediation. If employment is claimed at an AWE or BV during a time in which such facility was designated a DOE facility during remediation, the case file is forwarded to National Office for review. Chapter E-400 discusses DOE remediation in detail.

(3) The CE proceeds to develop the employment evidence, as needed, in accordance with Chapter 2-0100 Developing Factual Evidence and Chapter E-400 Establishing DOE Employment and Exposure. If necessary, the CE makes the appropriate Document Acquisition Request (DAR) for exposure information.

c. Simultaneously, the CE reviews the claim for eligible survivors, when applicable. When an EE-2 form(s) is received, the CE reviews the claim and determines whether all eligible survivors have been accounted for and given the opportunity to apply for survivor benefits. In addition, the CE reviews the claim for sufficient evidence to support the relationship between the survivor and the employee (Please refer to Chapter 2-0200 Establishing Survivorship and Chapter E-600 Establishing Survivorship). The RCs do not develop for employment or occupational history if it is clear that no eligible survivor exists (primarily in instances involving adult children under Part E). The CE must review the evidence of record to confirm the absence of an eligible survivor before issuing a RD based upon RC determination, as the RCs do not perform any adjudication functions.

(1) Under Part B of the EEOICPA the eligible survivors are the surviving spouse, children, parents, grandchildren, or grandparents at the time of payment.

(2) Under Part E of the EEOICPA the eligible survivors are the surviving spouse and certain eligible children at the time of the employee’s death. (See Chapter E-600).

d. Once the CE reviews the claim, the CE reviews the New Claims Review Checklist and ECMS to ensure the claim was entered correctly in ECMS (Please refer to Chapter E-200 Case Creation). In addition, the CE ensures that all coding of RC actions are input as discussed above.

5. Initial Exposure Development. RC Staff conduct occupational history development actions on most new Part E claims filed after August 1, 2005, and on certain Part D/E claims filed prior to that time. In conjunction with this step, the CE prepares the Document Acquisition Request (DAR) form (when appropriate) outlined in Chapter E-400 and forwards it to the proper DOE Operations Center or corporate verifier requesting exposure information to compliment the RC findings. Exposure development is treated at length in Chapter E-400.

a. Occupational History Interview. Exposure information is partially obtained through the occupational history interview conducted at the RC. Two separate interview scripts were prepared (one for DOE employment, one for RECA), and the findings outlined in these documents serve to assist the CE in honing down exposure development as it relates to causation.

b. Claimed Condition. The CE reviews the claimed employment, exposure documentation, the site/illness matrices (See E-500), and the claimed condition to determine the proper course of development for causation under the Act.

c. Assignment to RC. The CE reviews all old Part D cases and new Part E cases filed prior to August 1, 2005 on the criterion outlined below to determine whether or not an occupational history interview is required. This is discussed in more detail in E-400.

(1) Memorandum to RC. If the CE determines that the evidence of file is insufficient to develop for exposure or that an OHQ would supplement the record, a memo is prepared to the RC manager assigning the RC with an occupational history development task. Such evaluations are made on a case-by-case basis and are determined by reviewing the evidence of file as a whole and the exposure evidence in particular.

(2) RC Task Completion and Memorandum of Findings. Upon receipt of such assignment, the RC has 14 calendar days in which to complete the occupational history interview and return the findings to the DO with a cover memorandum outlining all tasks and when such tasks were conducted.

6. Former Part D Claims. Former Part D claims have been incorporated into the existing Part B EEOICPA files. DOE may have gathered documents through development that are relevant to DEEOIC’s current development needs. However, the CE must use his or her discretion when reviewing this documentation. The CE must review these claims for medical, employment, and survivorship (if applicable) information. The case file may contain copies of records from a Part B claim (i.e. medical records, CE development letters, EE-5 forms, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) dose reconstruction report, a recommended decision, a final decision, etc.) and/or records that were gathered by the DOE Office of Worker Advocacy (OWA). As noted above, should the evidence of file require an occupational history interview, the CE assigns the task to the RC. Any employment development not previously undertaken by the RC is conducted at the DO; no RC assignment is necessary. The evidence in these claims may include the following:

a. Claim forms.

(1) EE-1 form, EE-2 form, or EE-3 form.

(2) Form 350.2 Employee Request for Review by Physician Panel. This is the primary application form for current or former DOE contract employees under Part D.

(3) Form 350.3 Survivor Request for Review by Physician Panel. This is the primary application for a survivor of a former DOE contract employee under Part D.

(4) Form KK-1, KK-2 - OWA1-7/6/01 Request for Review by Medical Panels. These forms were initially used by DOE for filing of claims by the employee and by the survivor, respectively, and for the claims to then be reviewed by the Medical Panels. These were internal forms used by OWA only. Once these forms became approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) they became known as Form 350.2 Employee Request for Review by Physician Panel and Form 350.3 Survivor Request for Review by Physician Panel, respectively.

If none of the DOE/OWA forms are located, the CE reviews the file for any written correspondence from the claimant that may contain words of a claim. As with Part B of the EEOICPA, any written correspondence containing reference to a request for benefits or review by the DOE physician panel is considered a filed claim under Part E.

b. Highlight sheet. This form provides a chronological description of the adjudicative actions, follow up information, and documented phone calls by the OWA. This information was entered in OWA’s Case Management System (CMS).

c. Medical records. This includes medical narratives, pathology reports, clinical reports, and diagnostic reports.

d. Survivorship Evidence. This includes marriage certificates, divorce decrees, birth certificates, adoption papers, death certificates, obituaries, and school records.

e. Employment Evidence. This may include a DAR containing employment records such as job position descriptions, job personnel information, security clearance information, employment dates, medical records, accident/incident reports, radiation records, and dosimetry records. If a DAR already exists in the case file, the CE does not issue another request.

f. Occupational Medical Questionnaire. This form is in the case file if completed by a Resource Center staff member and/or by an OWA staff nurse based on conversations with claimants.

g. Physician Panel Report. Some case files may contain this report which was completed by the OWA physicians. This report consists of the OWA physician’s discussion, rationale, and conclusion as to whether the claimed condition(s) was aggravated, contributed to, or caused by a toxic substance. Additional guidance as to the proper evaluation of these reports as they relate to causation is outlined below.

h. Former Worker Program (FWP) Documents. As discussed in greater detail below, DOE conducts medical screening on former DOE facility workers. These studies generate documentation of claimed illnesses and exposure. The CE may encounter DOE FWP documentation in the case file. The CE reviews DOE FWP findings with the totality of the evidence of file when evaluating for causation.

i. Authorized Representative Release Form. The claimant may have designated an authorized representative to act on his or her behalf in the adjudication process with DOE. The CE contacts the claimant to determine whether this designation is still valid (please refer to 2-1200 Representative Services). Given that the regulations provide for one authorized representative per claimant at a time, if a claimant has an authorized representative under Part B and a different representative is appointed in the Part D case file, the CE contacts the claimant to determine who the claimant wishes to act as his/her sole authorized representative under the EEOICPA.

j. Duplicate Records. The CE may encounter duplicate copies of records within the Part D case file. The CE maintains the integrity of the Part D case file by keeping it in the order that it was received in the district office. The CE does not remove any duplicate copies until the CE ensures that such copies are indeed present in the case file. In this instance the CE shreds the duplicate photocopy.

7. Official Positive DOE Panels. If a positive DOE physician panel finding is present in a Part D case file and the DOE approval letter is signed by a DOE official, the physician panel finding is considered an official positive determination from DOE. Generally, such claims are in posture for acceptance of causation under Part E. However, in survivor claims the CE needs to determine whether the claimant is an eligible survivor under Part E of the EEOICPA and that the covered Part E employee’s death was aggravated by, caused by, or contributed to by the accepted covered illness (Please refer to Chapter E-600 Establishing Survivorship). Also, the CE needs to determine whether any compensation was received from a state workers’ compensation plan by the claimant (see section 10 below and Chapter E-1000 State Workers’ Compensation). Therefore, additional development of the survivorship and potential coordination issues might be required of the CE prior to issuing a recommended decision, even though there is a positive physician panel report in the case file.

8. Unofficial Positive DOE Panels. If a positive DOE panel finding is present in the case file, but no accompanying approval letter exists signed by a DOE official, the case is not in posture for immediate acceptance. In these cases, the physician panel report has not been sent to the claimant and the CE does not consider it an official positive determination from DOE. Therefore, the CE reviews the claim to determine if further development actions are needed concerning survivors, medical, employment or exposure pursuant to guidance provided in the development chapters of this Part. Information contained in an unofficial finding could prove useful for development of the medical, employment, and/or exposure portions of a claim.

9. Reviewing Part B/E Claims. Under EEOICPA, a claim based on DOE contractor/subcontractor employment which has been accepted under Part B is also accepted for causation under Part E for the accepted Part B covered occupational illness, if all other appropriate criteria under Part E are met. Unlike a Part E claim with an accepted Part B claim, under the EEOICPA a claim that has been accepted under Part E is not automatically accepted under Part B. In the development of these cases, the CE needs to be aware of the medical, employment, and survivorship differences that exist between Part B and E claims (inclusive of RECA claims), that can result in additional development and/or not approving the claim under Part E, even though it has been approved under Part B.

a. Medical differences between Part B and E claims include the following:

(1) Covered illnesses under Part E include all the covered occupational illnesses under Part B (i.e. beryllium sensitivity, chronic beryllium disease, chronic silicosis, and cancer) plus additional covered illnesses (i.e. asbestosis). However, the covered occupational illnesses under Part B do not include all the covered illnesses under Part E (for example asbestosis, peripheral neuropathy, and anemia).

b. Employment difference between Part B and Part E claims includes the following:

(1) Covered employment under Part B includes DOE contractor/subcontractor, DOE federal, Section 5 RECA, BV, and AWE employment. Part E coverage extends to DOE contractor/subcontractor and Section 5 RECA employment, as well as certain onsite participants of atomic weapons testing covered under Section 4 of the RECA. Part E also covers certain periods of employment at AWE and BV facilities only during a period those facilities were designated as DOE facilities for remediation. Part E does not cover employment for beryllium vendors or AWE facilities outside of the time they were considered DOE facilities.

c. Survivorship differences between Part B and Part E claims. (See Chapter E-600).

d. Difference in RECA claims under Part B and Part E includes the following:

(1) An eligible survivor who is the child of the covered employee under RECA and under Part B, is not an eligible survivor under Part E unless he or she meets the definition of “covered child” (please refer to Chapter E-600 Establishing Survivorship).

(2) An employee who does not meet the employment and other requirements under RECA section 5 (and therefore under Part B) may be eligible under Part E (Please refer to Chapter 2-0900 Eligibility Criteria for Uranium Workers and Chapter E-700 Eligibility Requirements for Certain Uranium Workers).

(3) An employee who does not meet the medical criteria for covered conditions under RECA section 5 (and therefore under Part B) may still be eligible under Part E (i.e. all cancers, asbestosis, etc.) (Please refer to Chapter 2-0900 Eligibility Criteria for Uranium Workers and Chapter E-700 Eligibility Requirements for Certain Uranium Workers).

(4) Certain onsite participants of atomic weapons testing covered under Section 4 of the RECA are potentially afforded coverage under Part E.

e. Developing Claims with Decided/Pending Part B Claims when one or more (but not all) of the Part B claimants have filed a Part D claim. In instances where there is more than one Part B claimant and some, but not all, of them have filed under Part D, all Part B claimants must receive claim development, due process, and adjudication under Part E. See Chapter E-200 Case Creation for new claim form requirements and filing dates.

10. DOE Former Worker Program (FWP). As noted above, DOE conducts medical screening on former DOE facility workers. The DOE FWP began in 1996 and is designed to evaluate the effects of DOE's past operations on the health of former workers employed at a DOE facility. The program generates documentation related to medical conditions and workplace exposure that may assist the CE in developing and adjudicating a claim. In some instances, DOE FWP records will be extant in the Part D case file. If no records exist in the Part D case file, or a new Part E, B/E claim is filed, the CE requests DOE FWP documents in the initial development stage. Additional information regarding the DOE FWP is available at: http://www.eh.doe.gov/health/. The CE reviews DOE FWP records in light of the evidence of file as a whole when evaluating a claim. Chapter E-500 provides an explanation as to how DOE FWP records are utilized as tools by the CE in assessing causation.

a. Medical Component. DOE FWP records contain valuable information regarding former DOE worker medical conditions, and can assist the CE when evaluating for a covered illness. The FWP is a screening program and does not provide a final diagnosis for the medical conditions detected. If the screening tests identify a potential disease, the employee is referred to his/her treating physician for further medical workup and diagnosis.

(1) Medical test results conducted by the FWP (i.e. pulmonary function tests, beryllium lymphocyte proliferation tests, blood tests, X-rays with B reader interpretations, etc.) are valid and interpreted by certified medical professionals. As such, the CE may utilize such test results in evaluating for a covered illness provided a physician’s interpretation is present on the test result.

b. Exposure Component. The DOE FWP medical screening is conducted to evaluate former DOE workers for adverse health outcomes related to occupational exposures (such as beryllium, asbestos, silica, welding fumes, lead, cadmium, chromium, and solvents). Accordingly, valuable exposure information is contained in these records. The CE reviews DOE FWP screening records along with the evidence of file as a whole when evaluating claimed exposure.

(1) Work History Interview. The FWP requests that the former DOE employee undergo a Work History Interview examining workplace exposure at DOE facilities. The results of the interview are used by the CE when assessing work history and exposure.

c. Determining if DOE FWP Records Exist. The CE must review the case file/claim forms to determine whether or not DOE FWP records exist.

(1) Part D Cases. As indicated, some old Part D cases will contain DOE FWP records. The CE searches the case file for cover memos or medical records provided by the FWP. The CE should also refer to DOE Form 350.2 Employee Request for Review by Physician Panel, question 11, or Form 350.3 Survivor Request, question 11, to determine if the claimant indicated if he/she or the employee was a participant in the FWP. If records are not present in the file, but there is some indication that they may exist, the CE proceeds to obtain them as outlined below.

(2) New B/E Claims. With regard to new claims, the CE must review the EE-3 and/or section 5(B) of the DOL Occupational History Interview (See Chapter E-400) to determine if the employee was a participant in a FWP screening program at the claimed work site. If the employee was a participant, the CE prepares a request package to be sent to the respective FWP.

d. Obtaining DOE FWP Records. In instances where no records exist in an old Part D case, or a new Part E claim is filed, the CE requests the records from the appropriate FWP Point of Contact (POC). The complete FWP POC list is available for viewing on the Shared Drive by accessing the Part E folder, Former Worker Program subfolder. If the records are unavailable at a POC, or the POC can not be determined, or a new EE-3 is required (see below), the CE requests assistance from the claimant.

(1) DOE FWP POC Request. When the CE determines that DOE FWP records must be requested, the CE reviews the FWP POC list to identify the appropriate POC. The CE prepares a package accompanied by a cover letter to the DOE FWP POC (Exhibit #1). The package includes the following: letter to the FWP (Exhibit #1), a cover memo, EE-1 or EE-2, and the new EE-3. The CE should state in the memo that an EEOICPA claim has been received for the named DOE employee; the employee was a participant in the specified FWP; DOL is requesting a copy of all FWP records. The memo and package is faxed or mailed to the designated FWP POC.

(a) The new signed EE-3 serves as an authorization to release FWP records to the DOL. DOE FWPs will only accept a signed new EE-3 as a release for medical records.

(b) If the case file contains an old EE-3, the CE writes to the claimant requesting that the claimant complete and sign a new EE-3, as that is the only form accepted by the FWPs. Once the new EE-3 is received, the CE prepares the request package as outlined above.

(2) Contacting the Claimant. When the CE is unable to locate FWP records, or a new EE-3 is required, the CE contacts the claimant in writing to determine if the employee was a participant in a FWP at the claimed work site. The CE includes a new EE-3 with the letter and instructs the claimant to complete, sign and return the new EE-3 to the DO ONLY if the employee participated in the FWP.

e. DEEOIC National Office (NO) obtained a database from the Building Trades National Medical Screening Program. The database contains work history and medical test results for certain employees who worked at Amchitka Island, Savannah River, Oak Ridge, and Hanford, who filed a part D claim with DOE from 2000-2004. The CE views medical data and work histories contained in the database by accessing the Shared Drive Part E folder/Former Worker Program subfolder. The “read me” file in the FWP subfolder contains detailed instructions on how to navigate the database and retrieve information.

(1) Searching the Database. The CE searches the database for medical information, and prints the results. The medical results generated from the database do not contain a physician’s signature. A letter from the Building Trades FWP Medical Director, describing the information obtained in the database search and attesting to its validity, is located on the Shared Drive, Part E folder, FWP subfolder. The CE prints the medical director’s letter and attaches it to the search results. The CE places the medical director’s letter and the database search results into the case file. The information obtained is weighed with the evidence of file as a whole.

f. DOE FWP ECMS Coding.

(1) When a records request is made to the FWP, the CE enters a ‘SF’ - Records Request Sent to Former Worker Program” claim status code into the claim status history section on the ECMS claim screen. The status effective date of the ‘SF’ code is equal to the date of the cover letter/memo to the FWP.

(2) Upon receipt of records from the FWP, the CE enters the ‘RF’ – Response Received From Former Worker Program” claim status code into the claim status history section on the ECMS claim screen. The status effective date of the ‘RF’ code is equal to the stamp date when the response was received in the district office.

(3) If the CE contacts the claimant in writing to determine if the employee was a participant in a FWP at the claimed work site, the CE enters the ‘DO’ claim status code into the claim status history section on the ECMS claim screen. The status effective date of the ‘DO’ code is the date of the letter sent to the claimant requesting the information.

11. State Workers’ Compensation Coordination of Benefits. The CE develops for any information concerning state workers’ compensation benefits (including payments of medical benefits) pursuant to Chapter E-1000 State Workers’ Compensation.

a. The claimant indicates on the EE-1/2 whether or not he or she filed a state workers’ compensation claim. The CE develops to determine if the claim is compensable under the EEOICPA. If coverage is afforded and the claimant indicates that he or she filed a state workers’ compensation claim for the same condition accepted in Part E, the CE writes a development letter to the claimant. The development letter requests that the claimant submit a written statement from the entity of issuance verifying the total amount and type of state workers’ compensation benefits paid.

12. General ECMS Coding. Each development action taken, requires a claim status code entry in ECMS, as outlined in EEOICPA PM 02-1500. Since there are currently two ECMS systems, ECMS B and E, it is only necessary to enter the claim status code in the specific system that the development action pertains to.

a. For Part B only claims, all claim status coding is entered directly into ECMS B.

b. For Part E only claims, all claim status coding is entered directly into ECMS E.

c. For Part E/B claims, wherein the Part B and Part E are both still active (i.e., that both are currently in development): all development actions (i.e. employment verification, occupational history development, medical or survivorship development) must be entered into

both ECMS Part B and ECMS Part E. For example, upon receiving an EE-5 back from DOE, the ‘ER’ code is necessary in BOTH systems. Since the case is E/B, the code is entered in ECMS B and ECMS E.

d: For Part E/B claims, wherein only one part is currently active (i.e., the B part of the claim had a final decision issued previously, and the only part in development is Part E, or vice versa): all development actions will only be entered in the system where the Part is currently active.

(1) Some information on the first screen is shared between ECMS B and ECMS E. Case information that automatically transfers between the two systems includes the following fields:

· CE

· CE Assign Dt

· Dist Office

· Location

· Location Assign Dt

· Employee Name and Address fields

· Worksite fields

(2) However, when there are different medical conditions under Parts B and E, such as Cancer for Parts B and E, and Asbestosis only under Part E, if an action is taken exclusively for an E only condition, that development code is entered in ECMS E. For example, a development letter is sent to the claimant requesting additional medical on the Asbestosis condition, the ‘DM’ code is entered in ECMS E.

13. ECMS Codes for Wage Loss Development.

a. Developing Wage Loss.

(1) When the CE sends a wage loss development letter, the CE enters the “DO” (Developing Other) code into ECMS. The status effective date of the “DO” entry is the date on the letter that is sent to the claimant. Upon entry of the “DO” code, the CE selects “WL-Wage Loss” as the reason code in the drop down box. If a follow up letter to the claimant is required, the CE codes another “DO” in ECMS as discussed above.

b. Use the following when wage loss is claimed:

(1) ‘WC – Wage Loss Claimed’. This code is used when the claimant informs DEEOIC in writing that they wish to pursue a wage loss claim. The status effective date is the postmark date of the letter, if available, or the date the letter is received in the DO/RC.

c. Concurrent Development of Wage Loss and Impairment.

(1) In instances where the CE is developing for wage loss and impairment at the same time, the CE selects the “DO” code and then the “WI-Wage Loss & Impairment” as the reason code in the drop down box. All other codes for developing impairment claims are discussed in EEOICPA Transmittal 06-01 which revises Chapter E-900 Impairment Ratings.

Paragraph and Subject Page Date Transmittal No.