Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP)

Division of Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation (DEEOIC)

On This Page Definition Employees of Other Federal Agencies

DOE Contractor Employees

Below are the head notes for the final FAB decisions relating to the topic heading, DOE Contractor Employees. The head notes are grouped under the following subheadings: Definition of, Employees of other federal agencies, and Employees of state agencies. In order to view a particular decision in its entirety, click on the hyperlink for that decision at the end of the head note.

Definition

• While the EEOICPA does not contain a specific definition of a DOE contractor, it does contain a definition of a “DOE contractor employee” that, in effect, defines what a DOE contractor is. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 366-2002 (Dep’t of Labor, June 3, 2003); EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 27798-2003 (Dep’t of Labor, June 20, 2003).
• A civilian employee of a state or federal government agency can be considered a “DOE contractor employee” if the government agency employing that individual is: (1) found to have entered into a contract with DOE for the accomplishment of services it was not statutorily obligated to perform; and (2) DOE compensated the agency for that activity. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 30971-2002 (Dep’t of Labor, March 15, 2004); EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 34291-2003 (Dep’t of Labor, August 1, 2003).
• In determining whether the state of Kentucky contracted with DOE to provide services at a DOE facility, DOE’s conveyance of certain land to the state was not compensation for any services performed for DOE but was rather for the purpose of wildlife management. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 34291-2003 (Dep’t of Labor, August 1, 2003).
• The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife was not considered to be a DOE contractor since it performed activities on DOE-owned land for which it was otherwise responsible under state law. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 34291-2003 (Dep’t of Labor, August 1, 2003).
• A “contractor” is an entity engaged in a contractual business arrangement with DOE to provide services, produce materials or manage operations at a beryllium vendor or DOE facility. A “subcontractor” is an entity engaged in a contracted business arrangement with a beryllium vendor contractor or a contractor of DOE to provide a service at a beryllium vendor or DOE facility. A “contract” for the purpose of determining whether an entity is a “DOE contractor” is an agreement to perform a service in exchange for compensation, usually memorialized by a memorandum of understanding, a cooperative agreement, an actual written contract, or any form of written or implied agreement. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 34291-2003 (Dep’t of Labor, August 1, 2003).
• In determining whether the state of Kentucky contracted with DOE to provide services at a DOE facility, the fact that the state was not required to compensate DOE for the use of DOE-owned property did not, conversely, show that DOE compensated the state for services provided to DOE. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 34291-2003 (Dep’t of Labor, August 1, 2003); EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 34771-2003 (Dep’t of Labor, July 21, 2003).
• To support a finding that a contractor employee or subcontractor employee performed work for DOE and was therefore a DOE contractor employee, the individual must have performed a “service” for the benefit of DOE within the boundaries of a DOE facility. The mere delivery of goods alone is insufficient to establish that a service was performed for the benefit of DOE. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 50247-2004 (Dep’t of Labor, September 16, 2004).
• Sales representative for a railroad that hauled freight cars after they had been removed from the DOE facility by another company is not a covered employee where there is no evidence of a contractual relationship between his employer and the DOE to provide management, remediation or any other services at the facility. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 56806-2004 (Dep’t of Labor, November 1, 2004).
• Employee provided evidence of his employment at Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Piketon, Ohio, but DOE was unable to verify his employment. A security card indicating that the employee had clearance at the site from April 18, 1975 to June 25, 1980 was evidence of a contract between General Telephone and Portsmouth GDP during that time period. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 58478-2004 (Dep’t of Labor, September 15, 2004).
• Survivor who submitted a statement indicating that her husband was employed by Illinois Central Railroad as a flagman and conductor was unable to establish covered employment because the mere delivery and loading or unloading of goods alone is insufficient to establish that a service was performed for the benefit of DOE. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 61192-2005 (Dep’t of Labor, April 5, 2005).
• Employee was found to have been an employee of the AEC. Erroneous finding by a Physicians Panel under Part D that the employee was employed by a DOE contractor is not binding on OWCP. An employee of the federal government cannot be considered an employee of a government contractor or subcontractor, unless the government agency by which they are employed has a contract with DOE to provide services that meet the criteria established in EEOICPA Bulletin No. 03-26 (June 3, 2003). EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 10028664-2006 (Dep’t of Labor, August 24, 2006).

Back to Top

Employees of Other Federal Agencies

• Individual’s mere presence on DOE-owned property did not confer covered employment status. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 366-2002 (Dep’t of Labor, June 3, 2003); EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 27798-2003 (Dep’t of Labor, June 20, 2003); EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 34291-2003 (Dep’t of Labor, August 1, 2003).
• Employee of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers who provided services on Amchitka Island was not a DOE contractor employee because he provided services on Amchitka in conjunction with a Department of Defense venture, the Blair Lake Project, and not pursuant to a contract between DOE and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 366-2002 (Dep’t of Labor, June 3, 2003).
• A civilian employee of a state or federal government agency can be considered a “DOE contractor employee” if the government agency employing that individual is: (1) found to have entered into a contract with DOE for the accomplishment of services it was not statutorily obligated to perform; and (2) DOE compensated the agency for that activity. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 30971-2002 (Dep’t of Labor, March 15, 2004); EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 34291-2003 (Dep’t of Labor, August 1, 2003).
• An employee of the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey who provided services at the Nevada Test Site and was issued a radiation badge by the AEC did not perform such services pursuant to a contract between the AEC and the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey. As opposed to private companies, government agencies often cooperate with and provide services for other agencies absent a contract for remuneration. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 30971-2002 (Dep’t of Labor, March 15, 2004).
• Survivor was able to establish that employee was a member of the SEC by submitting documents generated by USGS and other third parties verifying employment with USGS on Amchitka Island: a technical letter prepared by USGS for the AEC indicating that the employee was part of a reconnaissance team on Amchitka; a USGS paper prepared on behalf of the AEC stating that the employee was involved in mapping on Amchitka; a letter of appreciation from AEC to USGS for the employee’s part in a reconnaissance team on Amchitka Island; and an employment history affidavit from two co-workers at USGS during the 1960's and 1970's. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 63258-2005 (Dep’t of Labor, March 11, 2005).