BRB No. 97-0802 BLA
                                        


WILLIAM M. MOORE

          Claimant-Petitioner

          v.

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' 
COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

          Respondent)
)
)
     )
)     DATE
ISSUED:01/20/1998         

)
)
)
)
)
)
)     DECISION AND ORDER


     Appeal of the Decision and Order - Denial of Benefits on Remand from the   Benefits Review Board of Paul H. Teitler, Administrative Law Judge, United
States    Department of Labor.

     Carolyn M. Marconis, Pottsville, Pennsylvania, for claimant.

     Jennifer U. Toth (Marvin Krislov, Deputy Solicitor for National Operations;
     Donald S. Shire, Associate Solicitor; Rae Ellen Frank James, Deputy
     Associate Solicitor; Richard A. Seid and Michael J. Rutledge, Counsel for
     Administrative Litigation and Legal Advice), Washington, D.C., for the
     Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States
     Department of Labor.

     Before: SMITH, BROWN and DOLDER, Administrative Appeals Judges.

     PER CURIAM:

     Claimant  appeals the Decision and Order - Denial of Benefits  on
Remand from the Benefits Review Board (96-BLA-1225) of Administrative Law Judge
Paul H. Teitler  on a claim filed pursuant to the provisions of Title IV of the
Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969, as amended, 30 U.S.C. §901
et seq. (the Act).  

      A summary of the procedural history is as follows:  Claimant filed for
black lung benefits on January 20, 1981.  Director's Exhibit 1.  Administrative
Law Judge James J. Butler awarded benefits on July 26, 1984.  Director's Exhibit
31.  Following an appeal by the  Director, Office of Workers' Compensation
Programs (the Director), the Board vacated the award and remanded the case for
reconsideration at 20 C.F.R. §718.204(c), on February 27, 1987. Moore v.
Director, OWCP, BRB No. 84-1917 BLA (Feb. 27, 1987)(unpub.).   Director's
Exhibit 39.  On remand Judge Butler denied benefits on August 14, 1987, and on
reconsideration on February 19, 1988.  Director's Exhibits 40, 42.  Claimant
appealed.  The Board dismissed that appeal without prejudice when claimant
petitioned for modification.   Director's Exhibit 45.  Administrative Law Judge
Paul H. Teitler (the administrative law judge) denied modification on November
21, 1990.  Director's Exhibit 76.  Claimant appealed.  The Board reinstated
claimant's dismissed appeal and reviewed it, along with his most recent appeal. 
The Board vacated the denial of benefits and remanded for the administrative law
judge to reconsider Section 718.204(c) and (b), if reached. Moore v.
Director, OWCP, BRB Nos. 91-0636 BLA and 88-0947 BLA ( June 28,
1994)(unpub.).   Director's Exhibit 88.  On remand, Judge Teitler denied
benefits in a Decision and Order issued on March 29, 1995.   Director's Exhibit
92.   On September 5, 1995, claimant  timely sought modification of that
Decision and Order.  Director's Exhibit 94.  The district director denied
benefits and the case was transferred to the Office of Administrative Law Judges
on June 3, 1996 for a formal hearing.  Director's Exhibit 104.

  The administrative law judge adjudicated the case as a petition for
modification pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §725.310 under 20 C.F.R. Part 718.  He
determined that the issue before him was total respiratory disability at Section
718.204(c), and  causation at Section 718.204(b), if reached.  He found the
evidence insufficient to establish that there was a mistake in a determination
of fact or a change in conditions with respect to Section 718.204(c). 
Accordingly, he denied benefits.

     On appeal, claimant contends that the administrative law judge erred in
finding that claimant failed to demonstrate total respiratory disability at
Section 718.204(c)(1) and (c)(4).[1]   The
Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, in response, urges
affirmance of the administrative law judge's decision and order. 

     The Board's scope of review is defined by statute.  If the administrative
law judge's findings of fact and conclusions of law are supported by substantial
evidence, are rational and are consistent with applicable law, they are binding
upon this Board and may not be disturbed.  33 U.S.C. §921(b)(3), as
incorporated into the Act by 30 U.S.C. §932(a); O'Keeffe v. Smith,
Hinchman & Grylls Associates, Inc., 380 U.S. 359 (1965) 

     After consideration of the administrative law judge's Decision and Order,
the arguments on appeal and the relevant evidence of record, we conclude that
the administrative law judge's Decision and Order is supported by substantial
evidence , contains no reversible error, and therefore it is affirmed.

     In adjudicating the instant petition for modification pursuant to
Section 725.310, the administrative law judge properly applied the governing
standard in  Keating v. Director, OWCP, 71 F.3d 1118, 20 BLR 2-53 (3d
Cir. 1995), which, inter alia, requires consideration of the entirety of
the medical evidence. See also Kingery v. Hunt Branch Coal Co., 19 BLR 1-6 (1994); Napier v. Director, OWCP, 17 BLR 1-111 (1993); Nataloni v.
Director, OWCP, 17 BLR 1-82 (1993); Decision and Order at 2, 6, 7, 8.

     We reject claimant's contention that the administrative law judge erred at
Section 718.204(c)(1) in discounting the qualifying pulmonary function studies
administered by Dr. Kraynak.  Decision and Order at 2.  In making his finding
that the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate total respiratory disability
at Section 718.204(c)(1), the administrative law judge fully set forth the
reasoning  by Drs. Kraynak, Levinson and Sahillioglu regarding their analyses of
the pulmonary function studies.   Decision and Order at 3-5.  The
administrative law judge  properly credited the invalidations by Drs. Levinson
and Sahillioglu over Dr. Kraynak's validation of the studies he administered,
based on the superior qualifications of Drs. Levinson and Sahillioglu. See
Clark v. Karst-Robbins Coal Co., 12 BLR 1-149 (1989)(en banc); 
Siegel v. Director, OWCP, 8 BLR 1-156 (1985)(2-1 opinion with Brown. J.
dissenting).   Moreover, the administrative law judge found the qualifying
values reflected in studies administered by Dr. Kraynak  were unreliable because
of their disparity with Dr. Green's July 1, 1996 study, which demonstrated
higher values when claimant was eighty-one years of age.[2] See Baker v. North American Coal Corp., 7 BLR 1-79 (1984);
Burich v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.,  6 BLR 1-1189
(1984)(administrative law judge may discredit a pulmonary function study which
is disparately low in comparison with other studies);  Decision and Order at 6,
8.   Hence, in the instant case the administrative law judge provided an
adequate rationale for crediting the invalidations of Drs. Levinson and
Sahillioglu, see Siegel, supra; Winchester v. Director, OWCP, 9 BLR 1-177
(1986).  We therefore affirm the administrative law judge's finding that the
evidence is insufficient to demonstrate total respiratory disability at Section
718.204(c)(1), as based on substantial evidence.   

     The administrative law judge properly found that none of the blood gas
studies of record is qualifying and there is no evidence of cor pulmonale with
right sided congestive heart failure.  20 C.F.R §718.204(c)(2) and (c)(3).

       With respect to Section 718.204(c)(4), contrary to claimant's contention,
the administrative law judge was not required to credit Dr. Kraynak's opinion
that claimant was totally and permanently disabled from pneumoconiosis over Dr.
Green's opinion simply because Dr. Kraynak was a treating physician.  The status
of the physician is only one factor to be considered by the administrative law
judge in according weight to a medical opinion.  See Scharf v. Matthews,
574 F.2d 157 (3d Cir. 1978); see also Tedesco v. Director, OWCP, 18 BLR
1-103 (1994).    While the administrative law judge acknowledged that Dr.
Kraynak was a treating physician, Decision and Order at 5, he reasonably relied 
on the opinion of Dr. Green, who opined that claimant had the respiratory
capacity to perform his usual coal mine employment, based on Dr. Green's
superior qualifications in pulmonary medicine and because his opinion was based
on a reliable pulmonary function study. See Clark, supra; Wetzel v.
Director, OWCP, 8 BLR 1-139 (1985); Lucostic v. United States Steel
Corp., 8 BLR 1-46 (1985).  Thus, the administrative law judge permissibly
discounted Dr. Kraynak's  opinion as it  is less supported by the underlying
documentation, see generally Director, OWCP v. Siwiec, 894 F.2d 635, 13
BLR 2-259 (3d Cir. 1990); Kertesz v. Crescent Hills Coal Co., 788 F.2d
158, 9 BLR 2-1 (3d Cir. 1986); Clark, supra.   Moreover, contrary to
claimant's assertion, the administrative law judge permissibly credited the
opinion of Dr. Green regarding the severity of claimant's alleged disability,
even though Dr. Green  failed to diagnose pneumoconiosis.   The issue at Section
718.204(c) is the extent or degree of any respiratory disability, not the
etiology of the disability. See Taylor v. Evans and Gambrel Company,
Inc., 12 BLR 1-83 (1988); see generally  Beatty v. Danri
Corporation & Triangle Enterprises, 49 F.3d 993, 19 BLR 2-136 (3d Cir.
1995).  We therefore affirm the administrative law judge's finding  that the 
evidence is insufficient to establish total respiratory disability at Section
718.204(c), as based on substantial evidence and in accordance with law. 
Because claimant failed to establish a mistake in a determination of fact or a
change in conditions since the prior denial of benefits, we affirm the
administrative law judge's denial of benefits. See Keating, supra.
 Accordingly, the administrative law judge's Decision and Order - Denial of
Benefits on Remand from the Benefits Review Board is affirmed.

     SO ORDERED.

                                                                    
                         ROY P. SMITH
                         Administrative Appeals Judge



                                                                    
                         JAMES F. BROWN
                         Administrative Appeals Judge



                                                                    
                         NANCY S. DOLDER
                         Administrative Appeals Judge

To Top of Document

Footnotes.
 1)The parties stipulated to 12 years of coal mine employment 
and the existence of pneumoconiosis arising out of coal mine employment pursuant
to 20 C.F.R. §§718.202(a)(1) and 718.203(b).   [1997] Decision and
Order at 2; Hearing Transcript at 5-6.   We affirm, as unchallenged, the
administrative law judge's finding at 20 C.F.R. §718.204(c)(2) and (c)(3).
See Skrack v. Island Creek Coal Co., 6 BLR 1-710 (1983).
 Back to Text

 2)The Director correctly notes that the August 27, 1996
pulmonary function study conducted by Dr. Kraynak is non-qualifying.  Claimant's
Exhibit 3.  Dr. Kraynak's  non-qualifying study is contemporaneous with the non-qualifying September 9, 1996 study by Dr. Green on which the administrative law
judge relied.  Director's Exhibit 106.      
 Back to Text

To Top of Document