CITY OF PASADENA POLICE DEPARTMENT; HAZELRIGG RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., ANTHONY ANDERSON, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAANTHONY ANDERSON, Applicant,vs.CITY OF PASADENA POLICE DEPARTMENT; HAZELRIGG RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., Defendants.Case No. ADJ176741 (LAO 0875521)OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION Defendant seeks reconsideration of the January 27, 2009 Opinion and Decision After Reconsideration, wherein the Appeals Board found that the applicant sustained an industrial injury in the form of colon cancer. Defendant contends that the Appeals Board erred in finding the applicant sustained an industrial injury, arguing that the applicant has not satisfied the legal threshold for industrial compensability under Labor Code section 3212.1 For the reasons discussed in our January 27, 2009 Opinion and Decision After Reconsideration and for the reasons discussed below, we will deny defendant’s petition for reconsideration. As we discussed in our January 27, 2009 Opinion, pursuant to Labor Code section 3212.1, a peace officer who is exposed to a known carcinogen and develops or manifests cancer while employed is entitled to the presumption that the cancer is industrially caused. In order for the presumption to apply, the applicant must show, inter alia, that he was exposed to a known carcinogen during his employment. (Faust v. City of San Diego (2003) 68 Cal.Comp.Cases 1822 (Appeals Board en banc).) In its petition for reconsideration, defendant relies on Stavropoulos v. Workers’. Comp. Appeals Bd. (2005) 71 Cal.Comp.Cases 99 (writ denied), for the proposition that applicant has not , met his burden of showing exposure to a known carcinogen. In Stavropoulos, the Appeals Board found that the applicant did not show exposure to a known carcinogen, when the applicant’s qualified medical evaluator documented exposure to chemicals that were not carcinogens as defined b
Menu
