BRB No. 97-1769 BLA
GEORGIA BALDWIN )
(Widow of ROLIE BALDWIN) )
)
Claimant-Petitioner )
)
v. )
)
GLAMORGAN COAL CORPORATION ) DATE ISSUED:09/09/1998
)
Employer-Respondent )
)
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' )
COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED )
STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR )
)
Party-in-Interest ) DECISION and ORDER
Appeal of the Decision and Order of Daniel L. Leland, Administrative Law
Judge, United States Department of Labor.
Georgia Baldwin, Wise, Virginia, pro se.
H. Ashby Dickerson (Penn, Stuart, Eskridge & Jones), Abingdon, Virginia,
for employer.
Before: HALL, Chief Administrative Appeals Judge, SMITH and BROWN,
Administrative Appeals Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Claimant, the miner's widow, without the assistance of counsel,[1] appeals the Decision and Order (97-BLA-296) of
Administrative Law Judge Daniel L. Leland denying benefits 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). Considering
entitlement pursuant to 20 C.F.R. Part 718, the administrative law judge considered
the evidence of record and determined that it failed to establish that the miner
had suffered from pneumoconiosis prior to his death.[2] Accordingly, benefits were denied. On appeal, claimant generally
contends that the administrative law judge erred in his findings. Employer
responds, urging affirmance. The Director, Office of Workers' Compensation
Programs has indicated that he will not participate in this appeal.
In an appeal filed by a claimant without the assistance of counsel, the Board
considers the issue raised to be whether the Decision and Order below is supported
by substantial evidence. See Stark v. Director, OWCP, 9 BLR 1-36 (1986).
We must affirm the findings of the administrative law judge if they are supported
by substantial evidence, are rational, and are in accordance with applicable law.
33 U.S.C. §921(b)(3), as incorporated by 30 U.S.C. §932(a); O'Keeffe
v. Smith, Hinchman & Grylls Associates, Inc., 380 U.S. 359 (1965).
In order to establish entitlement to benefits in a survivor's claim filed
after January 1, 1982, claimant must establish that the miner's death was due to
pneumoconiosis or that pneumoconiosis was a substantially contributing cause or
factor leading to the miner's death or that death was caused by complications of
pneumoconiosis and that pneumoconiosis arose out of coal mine employment.[3] See 20 C.F.R. §§718.205(c),
718.202(a), 718.203; Lukosevicz v. Director, OWCP, 888 F.2d 1001, 13 BLR 2-100 (3d Cir. 1989); Trumbo v. Reading Anthracite Co., 17 BLR 1-85 (1993);
Boyd v. Director, OWCP, 11 BLR 1-39 (1988); Neeley v. Director, OWCP,
11 BLR 1-85 (1988).
After consideration of the administrative law judge's Decision and Order and
the evidence of record, we conclude that the administrative law judge's Decision
and Order denying benefits is supported by substantial evidence and contains no
reversible error therein. Initially, the administrative law judge reviewed the x-ray evidence of record and found that it contained forty interpretations of
fourteen x-rays. The administrative law judge noted that only two readings were
positive for pneumoconiosis, but that these interpretations were outweighed by
three negative readings by physicians who were dually qualified as both B-readers
and board-certified radiologists. The administrative law judge found that the
majority of the dually qualified physicians opined that the x-ray evidence was
negative for pneumoconiosis and concluded that claimant failed to establish the
existence of pneumoconiosis pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §718.202(a)(1). As the
administrative law judge permissibly found that the negative x-ray readings by
dually qualified physicians outweighed the two positive readings, of which one was
by a dually qualified physician, we affirm the administrative law judge's finding
pursuant to Section 718.202(a)(1). See Worhach v. Director, OWCP, 17 BLR 1-105 (1993); Edmiston v. F & R Coal Co., 14 BLR 1-65 (1990); Trent v.
Director, OWCP, 11 BLR 1-26 (1987); Dixon v. North Camp Coal Co., 8 BLR
1-344 (1985); Goss v. Eastern Associated Coal Corp., 7 BLR 1-400 (1984).
The administrative law judge properly concluded that none of the biopsy
reports indicate the presence of pneumoconiosis, and that an autopsy had not been
performed. Thus, the administrative law judge appropriately concluded that
claimant did not establish the existence of pneumoconiosis pursuant to 20 C.F.R.
§718.202(a)(2). Director's Exhibit 9. Furthermore, the administrative law
judge properly determined that claimant did not establish the existence of
pneumoconiosis pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §718.202(a)(3) as the presumptions at 20
C.F.R. §§718.305 and 718.306 were inapplicable, and claimant was
ineligible for the presumption at 20 C.F.R. §718.304 as the biopsy reports did
not indicate the presence of massive lesions in the miner's lungs.
Lastly, the administrative law judge found that at 20 C.F.R
§718.202(a)(4), Dr. Paranthaman was the only physician to diagnose the
presence of coal workers' pneumoconiosis. The administrative law judge found that
this opinion was outweighed by the opinions of Drs. Dahhan and Fino, who are both
board certified in internal medicine and pulmonary diseases.[4] As the administrative law judge acted within his discretion in
finding Dr. Paranthaman's opinion outweighed by the majority of physicians who did
not diagnose pneumoconiosis and permissibly accorded determinative weight to Drs.
Dahhan and Fino on the basis of the physicians' superior credentials, we affirm the
administrative law judge's finding that the medical opinion evidence does not
support a finding of pneumoconiosis pursuant to Section 718.202(a)(4). See
Trumbo, supra; Clark v. Karst-Robbins Coal Co., 12 BLR 1-149
(1989)(en banc); Trent, supra; Fields v. Island Creek Coal
Co., 10 BLR 1-19 (1987); Perry, supra. The administrative law
judge is empowered to weigh the medical evidence and to draw his own inferences
therefrom, see Maypray v. Island Creek Coal Co., 7 BLR 1-683 (1985), and the
Board may not reweigh the evidence or substitute its own inferences on appeal.
See Clark, supra; Anderson v. Valley Camp of Utah, Inc., 12 BLR 1-111
(1989). Inasmuch as claimant failed to establish the existence of pneumoconiosis,
we affirm the administrative law judge's denial of benefits in this survivor's
claim. See Lukosevicz, supra; Trumbo, supra.
Accordingly, the administrative law judge's Decision and Order denying
benefits is affirmed.
SO ORDERED.
BETTY JEAN HALL, Chief
Administrative Appeals Judge
ROY P. SMITH
Administrative Appeals Judge
JAMES F. BROWN
Administrative Appeals Judge
To Top of Document
Footnotes.
1) Ron Carson, a benefits counselor with Stone Mountain Health Services of St. Charles, Virginia, requested on behalf
of claimant, that the Board review the administrative law judge's decision, but Mr. Carson is not representing claimant
in this appeal. See Shelton v. Claude V. Keen Trucking Co., 19 BLR 1-88 (1995)(Order).
Back to Text
2) Claimant filed her application for survivor's benefits on April 17, 1995. Director's Exhibit 1.
Back to Text
3) This case arises within the jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. See Shupe
v. Director, OWCP, 12 BLR 1-200 (1989)(en banc).
Back to Text
4) Dr. Dahhan first examined the miner on December 21, 1992. His opinion that the miner did not suffer from
pneumoconiosis was based on the miner's employment, medical and smoking histories, as well as x-ray, pulmonary
function and blood gas studies, and a review of the miner's medical records. On May 14, 1993, Dr. Dahhan wrote a
supplemental opinion based on his review of additional medical records. He reiterated his finding of no pneumoconiosis
and no evidence of pulmonary impairment related to coal dust exposure, and noted that the miner's x-ray was highly
suspicious for lung cancer. Director's Exhibit 35.
Dr. Fino reviewed all of the miner's medical records and concluded that there was insufficient objective medical
evidence to justify a diagnosis of simple coal workers' pneumoconiosis. Dr. Fino also noted that the abnormalities in
the miner's chest x-ray was a possible malignancy. Director's Exhibit 35.
Back to Text
NOTE: This is an UNPUBLISHED BLA Document.
To Top of Document
|
