Cupertino Electric; Tig Specialty Insurance Company, Administered By Risk Enterprise Management Charles Beem WORKERS-COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIACHARLES BEEM, Applicant,vs.CUPERTINO ELECTRIC; TIG SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Administered By RISK ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ2209668 ISJO 0241727)(NECA/IBEW 1-ARB-060010)OPINION AND ORI)ERS GRANTING APPLICANT’S PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION Both applicant and defendam seek reconsideration of the Findings and Award issued by an arhiiiator on September 8. 2010. in which the arbitrator found that applicant”» October 11. 2000 industrial injury caused permanent disability of 81 percent with an attorney’s fee in the amount o! SI4.503.80. to he deducted from the fai end of the award. The arbitrator also found applicant lo be entitled to a life pension in an amount to be informally adjusted by the pames, with a 12 percent attorney’s lee to be deducted weekly. Applicant was previously found to have sustained an industrial hernia injury and to have sustained, as compensable consequences ofthat injury, psychiatric problems, gastrointestinal problems, recial bleeding, pain upon bowel movement and vasovagal syncope Reconsideration of these findings was denied on June 19. 2007. In his Petition for Reconsideration, applicant contends that the arbitrator erred in finding applicant’s permanent disability to be 81 percent rather than 100 percent Applicant argues that the arhiuator incorrectly apportioned “non-industrial medical apportionment in a non-medical vocational loss ol earning capacity setting ” (Applicant’s Petition for Reconsideration, p 2. lines 4.5-5.5. ‘ Applicant also argue’ that the arbitrator should not have applied the apportionment of permanent disability to the vocational issues, but should have applied the factors in Leboeuf v. , Workers’ Comp. Appeals fit/. (1983)
