Phetnakhonsy Bouapha v. Delta Marine Industries (Board decision, July 7, 2020)

BRB final decision. This unpublished decision is not precedent. The Board denied reconsideration of its earlier ruling. A Board decision ordinarily becomes final 60 days after issuance unless a timely petition for judicial review or Board reconsideration is filed under 20 C.F.R. § 802.406. A party may request Board reconsideration within 30 days under 20 C.F.R. § 802.407.

Plain-English summary

Phetnakhonsy Bouapha asked the Board to reconsider its earlier ruling in a Longshore Act case involving a work-related back injury. The Board explained that he was entitled to covered medical treatment but needed to give the employer documentation of those expenses for payment or reimbursement. It had affirmed the denial of disability compensation because the injury did not reduce his wage-earning capacity. After reviewing his motion, the Board found no basis to change its earlier decision and denied reconsideration.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Board reconsideration under 33 U.S.C. § 921(b)(5) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 802.407, 802.409.
• Outcome: Claimant's motion for reconsideration denied.
• Key point: The motion gave the Board no basis to change its prior ruling on medical expenses and disability compensation.

Full text (DOL BRB public release)

U.S. Department of Labor
Benefits Review Board
200 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20210-0001

BRB No. 19-0400

PHETNAKHONSY BOUAPHA
)
)
Claimant-Petitioner
)
)
v. )
)
DELTA MARINE INDUSTRIES
)
) DATE ISSUED: 07/07/2020
and
)
)
AMERICAN LONGSHORE MUTUAL
)
ASSOCIATION, LIMITED
)
)
Employer/Carrier-
) ORDER on
Respondents
) RECONSIDERATION

Claimant has filed a timely motion for reconsideration of the Board’s decision in this case, Bouapha v. Delta Marine Industries., BRB No. 19-0400 (Jun. 12, 2020) (unpub). 33 U.S.C. §921(b)(5); 20 C.F.R. §802.407. Employer has not responded.

Claimant is appearing without representation by counsel. In his motion, Claimant states he has not received compensation for his work-related back injury. In his decision, the administrative law judge determined Claimant is entitled to medical benefits for treatment he received for his upper back/shoulder work injury during the period from May 22, 2013 to November 19, 2013. However, the administrative law judge found Claimant did not submit any records to establish the cost of this treatment. Claimant must provide Employer with documentation of his covered medical expenses in order to either receive reimbursement or to have Employer directly pay the medical provider.

The administrative law judge found Claimant is not entitled to disability compensation because he did not sustain a loss of wage-earning capacity due to his work- related back injury. The Board affirmed this determination as it is supported by substantial evidence in the record.1 After consideration of Claimant’s contentions, we find no basis to modify the Board’s decision. Therefore, we deny Claimant’s motion for reconsideration. C.F.R. §802.409.

SO ORDERED.

JUDITH S. BOGGS, Chief
Administrative Appeals Judge

JONATHAN ROLFE
Administrative Appeals Judge

DANIEL T. GRESH
Administrative Appeals Judge

1
As the Board’s decision states, if claimant has evidence that establishes a change in his condition or a mistake of fact, he may file a request for modification with the district director. 33 U.S.C. §922; 20 C.F.R. §702.373. Claimant may also appeal the Board’s decision and this order on reconsideration. An appeal must be filed with the appropriate circuit court of appeals within 60 days of the date this order is filed by the Clerk of the Board. 33 U.S.C. §921(c); 20 C.F.R. §802.406.

2