SUTTER HEALTH, permissibly self-insured, TERRIE HADEN, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIATERRIE HADEN, Applicant,vs.SUTTER HEALTH, permissibly self-insured, Defendant.Case No. ADJ1516199 (OAK 0316575)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Findings, Award and Order of March 18, 2009, wherein the workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) found, in essence, that applicant sustained an admitted industrial injury to her neck, left upper extremity, and shoulders on August 24, 2000, while employed by defendant as a physical therapist, and that the injury caused, among other things, 100% permanent disability, without a basis for apportionment, entitling applicant to permanent total disability indemnity at the weekly rate of $490 for life In relevant part of the Opinion on Decision in support of the disputed Findings, Award and Order, the WCJ stated that he determined applicant to be 100% permanently disabled based on the medical evidence, primarily the opinion of Steven Isono, M.D., an orthopedic surgeon and the parties’ agreed medical evaluator (AME), but that Dr. Isono’s opinion that 10% of applicant’s neck permanent disability should be apportioned to pre-existing degenerative changes was not substantial evidence and was, therefore, not followed. Moreover, the WCJ stated, even if Dr. Isono’s apportionment opinion were considered to be substantial evidence and, consequently, applicant’s permanent disability based on the medical evidence alone would be 95%, that the vocational evidence, the opinion of Mary Ciddio, applicant’s vocational expert, also resulted in a 100% permanent disability determination. Defendant contends that the injury caused “no greater than 90%” permanent disability, arguing that Dr. Isono’s apportionment opinion is substantial evidence and that the WCJ should , have followed it. In the alternative, defendant contends that the r
