CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, permissibly self-insured, adjusted by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, LELEON KIZINE, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIALELEON KIZINE, Applicants,vs.CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, permissibly self-insured, adjusted bySEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ1188182 (SFO 481756)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION Defendant seeks reconsideration of the December 5, 2008 Findings of Fact and Award of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) who determined that applicant’s permanent disability should be rated using the 1997 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (1997 PDRS) instead of the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (2005 PDRS) and the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition (AMA Guides). Using the 1997 PDRS, the WCJ found that applicant incurred 57% permanent disability as a result of his admitted industrial injury to his knees and lumbar spine on February 11, 2004, while employed by defendant as a transit operator. Defendant contends that none of the exceptions to the use of the 2005 PDRS described in Labor Code section 4660(d) apply in this case, and applicant’s permanent disability should have been rated using the 2005 PDRS and the AMA Guides.1 Reconsideration is granted and the December 5, 2008 Findings of Fact and Award is rescinded. We agree with defendant that the record does not evidence an exception to the use of the AMA Guides and the 2005 PDRS. However, we do not rely upon the parties’ earlier stipulations to determine applicant’s permanent disability as part of our decision after 1Further statutory references are to the Labor Code. , reconsideration. Instead, we order that the parties are relieved of their stipulations regarding the rating of applicant’s permanent disability under the different PDRS schedules and return the case to the trial level for further proceedings
