12-0059. MILDRED L. WADE Employee v. CHUGACH SUPPORT SERVICES Employer and ZURICH AMERICAN INS CO. Insurer Defendants.

• Court: Alaska

Alaska Workers Compensation Decisions 2012. Workers' Compensation Board 12-0059. MILDRED L. WADE Employee v. CHUGACH SUPPORT SERVICES Employer and ZURICH AMERICAN INS CO. Insurer Defendants ALASKA WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD MILDRED L. WADE, Employee, Applicant, v. CHUGACH SUPPORT SERVICES, Employer, and ZURICH AMERICAN INS CO., Insurer, Defendants.FINAL DECISION AND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION AWCB Decision No. 12-0059Filed with AWCB Anchorage, Alaskaon March 22, 2012AWCB Case No. 200905161Chugach Support Services and Zurich American Insurance Company (collectively Employer) petitioned for reconsideration of Wade v. Chugach Support Services, AWCB Decision and Order No. 12-0033 (February 23, 2012) (Wade I) on March 1, 2012. Attorney Robert J. Bredesen appeared on Employer's behalf. Employee represented herself. Mildred Wade (Employee) did not file an opposition to the petition. ISSUES Employer asserts the board made a mistake of fact when it ordered a Second Independent Medical Evaluation (SIME) to be performed by Thomas Gritzka, M.D. At the time of the hearing and original decision, Employee was residing in the State of Washington, and Dr. Gritzka's office would have been more convenient to Employee. Employer contends, since Employee now lives in Colorado, the basis for ordering the SIME with Dr. Gritzka no longer exists and another physician should be selected to perform the SIME. Employee did not oppose the Petition for reconsideration but it is presumed she would not oppose selection of a physician in Colorado to perform the SIME since she is now residing in Colorado. 1) Shall Wade I be reconsidered? 2) Shall Wade I be modified? FINDINGS OF FACT A review of the record as a whole established the following facts and factual conclusions by a preponderance of the evidence: 1) In its Decision and Order issued on February 9, 2011, the Board discussed the evidence in the record, made factual findings, and concluded and ordered, in part:

To minimize travel for Employee, an orthopedist on the approved SIME list will be selected whose office is not too distant from Employee's home. Thomas L. Gritzka, M.D., is an orthopedist on the approved SIME list, and his office is in Milwaukee, Oregon. Therefore, an SIME is ordered to be performed by Dr. Gritzka. Dr. Gritzka will be asked to evaluate Employee to determine if any of Employee's current medical problems are the result of the work injury, if any additional medical treatment is needed as a result of the work injury, and if Employee has any permanent partial impairment as a result of the work injury. a. 1) The CandR shall not be approved at this time. 2) An SIME shall be ordered.

1) An SIME is ordered with Dr. Gritzka in accordance with this decision. 2) An SIME shall be conducted by Dr. Gritzka to ascertain if work was the substantial cause of Employee's disability or need for medical treatment, if Employee incurred a PPI as a

...