The Labor Enforcement Task Force (LETF), a multi-agency team of inspectors, yesterday participated in Operation Underground, a statewide enforcement action at construction worksites throughout California. Ten investigators from Cal/OSHA and the California Labor Commissioner’s offices were deployed in Los Angeles, the Silicon Valley, Fresno and the Inland Empire.The enforcement effort is focused on curbing practices common in the underground economy that harm legitimate businesses and workers, including wage theft, tax evasion and fraud.

As a result of inspections, 81citations with penalties of over $135,000 were issued for various labor law and workplace safety violations, including four work stop-orders for failure to maintain workers’ compensation coverage in Fresno, Chino Hills and Uplands. Inspectors found serious safety hazards such as saws without safety guards, scaffolding, stairways, and an open skylight on a roof with no guard rails.

Inspectors also found wage theft violations including inadequate workers’ compensation coverage, failure to pay overtime and failure to provide pay stubs.

Officials claims that not only do these practices provide a competitive edge over compliant establishments, they also compromise the well-being of employees and increase taxpayer burden. "These citations serve as a reminder that underground employers who commit wage theft and intentionally put their workers at risk will not be tolerated," said Christine Baker, Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), which administers LETF, and oversees both Cal/OSHA and the California Labor Commissioner’s offices. "LETF focused its resources on construction businesses yesterday due to the inherent danger and potential for labor violations."

The Labor Enforcement Task Force was formed in January 2012 to combat all industries that operate in the underground economy. The goal of LETF is to ensure safe working conditions, proper payment of wages, and create an environment where legitimate businesses can thrive as well as support the collection of taxes, fees and penalties due to the State of California.

The Labor and Workforce Development Agency, the first cabinet-level agency coordinating workforce programs, oversees both LETF, led by DIR, and the Joint Enforcement Strike Force (JESF), headed by the Employment Development Department. LETF and JESF both participated in today’s enforcement efforts, which were coordinated by the California Department of Insurance.

Additional information on the underground economy, the Labor Enforcement Task Force and DIR is posted online and on DIR’s Facebook and Twitter pages. California workers and employers can contact the task force hotline at 855-297-5322 to report documented complaints and enforcement tips ...

Edna Calaustro was sentenced to 24 months in prison and Mele Saavedra was sentenced to three years’ probation for conspiracy to commit health care fraud, conspiracy to pay and receive kickbacks involving the Medicare program, and health care fraud. , The announcement was made by United States Attorney Melinda Haag, FBI Special Agent in Charge David J. Johnson, and Special Agent in Charge for the Los Angeles Regional Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services Glenn R. Ferry.

The evidence at trial showed that beginning in approximately December 2006 and continuing through July 2011, Patrick Sogbein, the owner of Debs Medical Distributors, a Van Nuys durable medical equipment company, and his wife, Adebola Adefunke Adebimpe, the owner of Dignity Medical Supply, a Santa Clarita durable medical equipment company, submitted over 400 false and fraudulent claims to Medicare using fraudulent prescriptions and medical records prepared by Calaustro. The evidence also showed that Sogbein and Adebimpe worked with Calaustro, then a San Francisco-based physician, and street level recruiters, including Eduardo Abad and Saavedra.

Abad and Saavedra recruited beneficiaries at locations in the Tenderloin and South of Market neighborhoods in San Francisco, including a fast food restaurant at the Powell Street cable car turnaround and a Tenderloin neighborhood senior center. After identifying beneficiaries, Calaustro, with Abad or Saavedra, went to the beneficiaries’ homes with a portable copy machine, copied their Medicare cards, and conducted sham examinations to obtain background information for the required Medicare paperwork. Calaustro gave the fraudulent paperwork and bogus prescriptions to Sogbein and Adebimpe. Sogbein and Adebimpe, in turn, created additional fraudulent paperwork in the names of their respective companies and submitted the claims to Medicare. Sogbein paid Calaustro a $100 kickback for each power wheelchair prescription. Sogbein paid Abad and Saavedra a $100 and $50 kickback, respectively, for each beneficiary they identified. From December 2006 through July 2011, Sogbein and Adebimpe were paid more than $1.6 million for over 400 fraudulent power wheelchair claims submitted to Medicare using the fraudulent prescriptions written by Calaustro. In mid-2011, Calaustro began working as a physician in Los Banos.

Calaustro, 71, of Daly City and Los Banos, and Saavedra, 49, of San Francisco, respectively, along with co-defendants Sogbein, Adebimpe, and Abad, were indicted by a federal grand jury on Jan. 26, 2012, for conspiracy to commit health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, and health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Calaustro and Saavedra were arrested on Feb. 9, 2012, in Los Banos and San Francisco, respectively. After their initial appearances, Calaustro and Saavedra were released on bail. On Sept. 19, 2013, a grand jury returned a superseding indictment, charging Sogbein, Adebimpe, Calaustro, Abad, and Saavedra with conspiracy to commit health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, and health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. The indictment also charged Sogbein, Calaustro, Abad, and Saavedra with conspiracy to pay and received kickbacks involving the Medicare program, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.

On Sept. 30, 2013 and Oct. 21, 2013, respectively, Calaustro and Saavedra pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit health care fraud, conspiracy to receive kickbacks involving the Medicare program, and health care fraud. Calaustro and Saavedra both testified in November 2013 at the trial of co-defendants Sogbein, Adebimpe, and Abad.

The sentences for Calaustro and Saavedra were handed down by the Honorable Jeffrey S. White, United States District Court Judge. Judge White also sentenced Calaustro to a 3 year period of supervised release following her 24 month prison term and ordered forfeiture of $1,577,426 and restitution of the same amount to Medicare. Calaustro remains out of custody and is scheduled to begin serving her sentence on Nov. 17, 2014. Judge White sentenced Saavedra to perform 500 hours of community service during her 3 year term of probation and ordered forfeiture of $275,338 and restitution of the same amount to Medicare.

On June 17, 2014, co-defendants Sogbein, Adebimpe, and Abad, who were all convicted after trial, were sentenced to prison terms of 144 months, 51 months, and 12 months and 1 day, respectively. Sogbein is in custody. Adebimpe began serving her sentence. Abad remains out of custody pending his appeal.

Denise Marie Barton and Randy Luskey are the Assistant U.S. Attorneys who are prosecuting the case with the assistance of Assistant U.S. Attorney David Countryman, Beth Margen, and Bridget Kilkenny. The prosecution is the result of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in San Francisco and Office of Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services in Los Angeles ...

A Los Angeles County physician whose referrals led to more than $1.7 million in fraudulent Medicare billing pleaded guilty this to participating in a conspiracy to defraud Medicare by writing prescriptions for unneeded durable medical equipment (DME), such as power wheelchairs. Charles Okoye, a 52-year-old Carson resident, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud.

Appearing before United States District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald, Okoye admitted that he wrote prescriptions for medically unnecessary DME for patients referred to him through Adelco Medical Distributors, Inc., a Gardena-based DME supply company.

Between November 2008 and November 2011, Adelco recruited Medicare beneficiaries and took them to see Okoye, who would issue DME prescriptions - primarily for power wheelchairs -after giving the "patients" a single, cursory examination. Adelco then billed Medicare for providing the DME, which the beneficiaries did not want and often never used. In return for these referrals, Okoye received illegal kickbacks for every DME prescription from Adelco’s owner, Adeline Ekwebelem. Okoye’s referrals led Adelco to submit approximately $1.7 million in fraudulent claims to Medicare, and Medicare paid Adelco more than $820,000. Okoye also fraudulently billed Medicare more than $50,000 for services he claimed to have provided to the "patients" who received unnecessary prescriptions.

Ekwebelem, 51, of Hawthorne, is also charged in the case, and she is scheduled to go on trial before Judge Fitzgerald on September 9. The Adleco indictment charges four other defendants, three of whom have previously pleaded guilty. The final defendant is currently a fugitive.

In his plea agreement, Okoye also admitted that he engaged in a similar unlawful arrangement with another DME company, Esteem Medical Supply in Inglewood.

Okoye is scheduled to be sentenced by Judge Fitzgerald on December 8. At sentencing, Okoye faces a statutory maximum sentence of 10 years in federal prison. As part of his guilty plea, Okoye has agreed that the California Medical Board can revoke his license to practice medicine.

The investigation into Okoye, Ekwebelem, and the others involved in Adelco’s fraudulent scheme to defraud Medicare was conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation ...

After the report yesterday of the passing of Retired Workers' Compensation Judge Samuel L. Sosna Jr. we are saddened to learn of the passing of yet two additional members of our Southern California Workers' Compensation community.

Jack Paul Koszdin, the founding partner of the applicant's firm of Koszdin, Fields Sherry and Katz in Van Nuys California passed away on Sunday, August 24, 2014. There will be a memorial service this Wednesday, August 27, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. at Mt. Sinai Cemetery in the Chapel Tanach. The California State Bar website provides the following tribute to Jack.

Born in 1931, Jack Koszdin grew up in Chicago, a child of Russian Jewish immigrants. As a young man, he moved to California and attended UCLA for his undergraduate degree and his J.D. Admitted to the California State Bar in 1955, Jack Koszdin dedicated his professional life to securing the rights of injured workers throughout California, which he championed through the law, through the classroom and through broadcast media.

Jack strongly supported workers' union rights, serving as a founding member of VELPEC. He was legal advisor to the Valley Labor Political Education Council and co-hosted the Union Voice radio program.

Jack's passion for politics lead him to work on numerous political campaigns for democratic candidates throughout his career. He supported such notable leaders as Tom Bradley, Bill Lockyer, Hilda Solis, Loretta Sanchez, and Richard Katz, among many others.

Service to the community has always been a priority to Jack. He has served in leadership positions for such organizations as Red Cross, Child Guidance Clinic, and Valley Hillel. Jack lectured in law at UCLA, the University of West Los Angeles and L.A. Trade Tech. He was a partner in the firm of Levy, Koszdin and Woods before heading the firm of Koszdin and Siegel, which later became Koszdin, Fields, Sherry and Katz, where he remained senior partner until his recent retirement.

It is through the efforts of Jack P. Koszdin and the powerhouse attorneys like him, who over the years have zealously protected some of our state's most important yet vulnerable members -- the laborers -- that such landmark cases as Zemke v. Workmen's Comp. App. Bd. 68 Cal. 2d 794 and Franklin v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd., supra, 79 Cal.App.3d at pp. 237-238 came to be. After almost 60 years in the field of workers' compensation law, Jack cared deeply for the plight of the injured worker, whose rights and benefits need defending now more than ever.

While Jack's professional achievements are many, his greatest pride comes in the successes of his children, Shelli, Kari, Kenton, David and Frank, who are all accomplished professionals in their own right. He lived in Burbank, California with his beloved wife of years, Helen Griffin.

We must also report that Workers Compensation Judge Dennis Stach from the Riverside WCAB Passed away on August 7, 2014 in Norco, CA.

Judge Stach graduated from Elmwood Park High School in 1962. He enlisted in the US Air Force where he served as a Pararescue Specialist during the Vietnam era. He went on to undergraduate studies at California State Polytechnic University and then law school at the University of La Verne and became an attorney in 1979 and later served as a Workers' Compensation judge in Southern California. He retired in 2010 after 25 years of service.

Judge Stach is survived by his sister, Mary Ann Carr, from San Diego; and brother, William Stach, of Streamwood, IL.

The Southern California Workers' Compensation community will surly miss both of these fine professionals who were well respected and well liked by colleagues ...

Researchers aren’t sure why, but in the 23 U.S. states where medical marijuana has been legalized, deaths from opioid overdoses have decreased by almost 25 percent, according to a new analysis reported by Reuters Health.

California, Oregon and Washington first legalized medical marijuana before 1999, with 10 more following suit between then and 2010, the time period of the analysis. Another 10 states and Washington, D.C. adopted similar laws since 2010.

For the study reported in JAMA Internal Medicine, August 25, 2014,, Marcus A. Bachhuber, MD of the Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the University of Pennsylvania, and his colleagues used state-level death certificate data for all 50 states between 1999 and 2010. In states with a medical marijuana law, overdose deaths from opioids like morphine, oxycodone and heroin decreased by an average of 20 percent after one year, 25 percent by two years and up to 33 percent by years five and six compared to what would have been expected, according to results in JAMA Internal Medicine.

Meanwhile, opioid overdose deaths across the country increased dramatically, from 4,030 in 1999 to 16,651 in 2010, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Three of every four of those deaths involved prescription pain medications. Of those who die from prescription opioid overdoses, 60 percent have a legitimate prescription from a single doctor, the CDC also reports.

Medical marijuana, where legal, is most often approved for treating pain conditions, making it an option in addition to or instead of prescription painkillers, Bachhuber and his coauthors wrote. But the full scope of risks, and benefits, of medical marijuana is still unknown. "I think medical providers struggle in figuring out what conditions medical marijuana could be used for, who would benefit from it, how effective it is and who might have side effects; some doctors would even say there is no scientifically proven, valid, medical use of marijuana," Bachhuber said. "More studies about the risks and benefits of medical marijuana are needed to help guide us in clinical practice."

Marie J. Hayes of the University of Maine in Orno co-wrote an accompanying commentary in the journal. "Generally healthcare providers feel very strongly that medical marijuana may not be the way to go," she told Reuters Health. "There is the risk of smoke, the worry about whether that is carcinogenic but people so far haven’t been able to prove that." There may be a risk that legal medical marijuana will make the drug more accessible for kids and smoking may impair driving or carry other risks, she said. "But we’re already developing Oxycontin and Vicodin and teens are getting their hands on it," she said. If legalizing medical marijuana does help tackle the problem of painkiller deaths, that will be very significant, she said. "Because opioid mortality is such a tremendously significant health crisis now, we have to do something and figure out what’s going on," Hayes said.

The efforts states currently make to combat these deaths, like prescription monitoring programs, have been relatively ineffectual, she said. "Everything we’re doing is having no effect, except for in the states that have implemented medical marijuana laws," Hayes said. People who overdose on opioids likely became addicted to it and are also battling other psychological problems, she said. Marijuana, which is not itself without risks, is arguably less addictive and almost impossible to overdose on compared to opioids, Hayes said ...

A former San Mateo County files clerk caught on video working at restaurants she owned while collecting disability for a supposed back injury was sentenced Thursday to 120 days in jail, according to District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe. and the story in Insurance News Net.

But Superior Court Judge Craig Parsons recommended that sheriff's officials instead confine and electronically monitor Sunita Sagar, 46, inside her home over that period. Parsons also placed Sagar on probation for three years, but defense attorney Lauren Kramer said the felony fraud charge will be reduced to a misdemeanor after 18 months if she behaves.

Sagar and her husband own multiple restaurant franchises in the Bay Area, including several Denny's, a Baja Fresh and a Jack in the Box, although none in San Mateo County, Wagstaffe said. They also own a computer equipment store in Fremont.

According to prosecutors, Sagar collected disability benefits from 2008 to 2012 for a back injury she reportedly sustained while working. She convinced doctors she was "completely sedentary and could not conduct her daily activities," and requested in-home care, according to Wagstaffe.

But insurance fraud investigators caught Sagar on hidden video "engaged in a very active lifestyle" that included working at her businesses, walking and bending without sign of discomfort, according to Wagstaffe. When her doctors were shown the video, they confirmed that Sagar had misrepresented her disability and was able to work, the district attorney said.

Despite her client's no-contest plea, Kramer said the videos don't prove Sagar was working. The allegations "weren't ever tested," she added, because the case didn't go to trial. "Obviously we have a very different perspective," Kramer said in a phone interview Thursday. "She indisputably spent time at the restaurants they owned, but she was not involved in the day- to-day operations."

Sagar received approximately $22,000 in undeserved benefits, according to the district attorney's office. On Thursday, she was also ordered to pay restitution to the county totaling $54,773, which include the costs of the investigation, according to Wagstaffe ...

Retired Workers' Compensation Judge Samuel L. Sosna, Jr. passed last week after a long battle with cancer.

Hon. Samuel L. Sosna, Jr. was retired as a Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge in the Van Nuys District Office of the California Division of Workers' Compensation. His retirement was announced in April, 2009. He was the past Presiding Judge of the Pasadena District Office from 1990 to 1996. He was well liked and well respected during his tenure as an attorney and as a Worker's Compensation Judge.

He received his undergraduate degree from Stanford University and his law degree from the University of California Los Angeles. He was admitted to the California Bar on January 14, 1959.

There has not been any public announcement of funeral arrangements ...

The U. S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) published in the Federal Register the new Final Rule moving hydrocodone combination products (HCPs) from Schedule III to the more-restrictive Schedule II, as recommended by the Assistant Secretary for Health of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and as supported by the DEA’s own evaluation of relevant data. The Federal Register has made the Final Rule available for preview on its website today at http://go.usa.gov/mc8d. This Final Rule imposes the regulatory controls and sanctions applicable to Schedule II substances on those who handle or propose to handle HCPs. It goes into effect in 45 days.

The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) places substances with accepted medical uses into one of four schedules, with the substances with the highest potential for harm and abuse being placed in Schedule II, and substances with progressively less potential for harm and abuse being placed in Schedules III through V. (Schedule I is reserved for those controlled substances with no currently accepted medical use and lack of accepted safety for use.) HCPs are drugs that contain both hydrocodone, which by itself is a Schedule II drug, and specified amounts of other substances, such as acetaminophen or aspirin.

"Almost seven million Americans abuse controlled-substance prescription medications, including opioid painkillers, resulting in more deaths from prescription drug overdoses than auto accidents," said DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart, "Today’s action recognizes that these products are some of the most addictive and potentially dangerous prescription medications available."

When Congress passed the CSA in 1970, it placed HCPs in Schedule III even though it had placed hydrocodone itself in Schedule II. The current analysis of HCPs by HHS and the DEA shows they have a high potential for abuse, and abuse may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence. Adding nonnarcotic substances like acetaminophen to hydrocodone does not diminish its abuse potential. The many findings by the DEA and HHS and the data that support these findings are presented in detail in the Final Rule on the website. Data and surveys from multiple federal and non-federal agencies show the extent of abuse of HCPs. For example, Monitoring the Future surveys of 8th, 10th, and 12th graders from 2002 to 2011 found that twice as many high school seniors used Vicodin®, an HCP, nonmedically as used OxyContin®, a Schedule II substance, which is more tightly controlled.

In general, substances placed under the control of the CSA since it was passed by Congress in 1970 are scheduled or rescheduled by the DEA, as required by the CSA and its implementing regulations, found in Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Scheduling or rescheduling of a substance can be initiated by the DEA, by the HHS Assistant Secretary of Health, or on the petition of any interested party. (Detailed information on the scheduling and rescheduling process can be found beginning on page 8 of Drugs of Abuse on the DEA’s website at http://www.justice.gov/dea/pr/multimedia-library/publications/drug_of_abuse.pdf.)

The rescheduling of HCPs was initiated by a petition from a physician in 1999. The DEA submitted a request to HHS for a scientific and medical evaluation of HCPs and a scheduling recommendation. In 2013, the U. S. Food and Drug Administration held a public Advisory Committee meeting on the matter, and the committee voted to recommend rescheduling HCPs from Schedule III to Schedule II by a vote of 19 to 10. Consistent with the outcome of that vote, in December of 2013 HHS sent such a recommendation to the DEA. Two months later, on February 27, the DEA informed Americans of its intent to move HCPs from Schedule III to Schedule II by publishing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register, outlining its rationale and the proposed changes in detail and soliciting public comments on the proposal, of which almost 600 were received. A small majority of the commenters supported the proposed change ...

An employee for a building remodeling company was scheduled to be arraigned for allegedly cashing in $24,000 in disability checks after telling doctors he could not work--and then working somewhere else installing granite and earning $54,000.

OCWeeky reports that Angel Monzon, 51, of Santa Ana, was charged with 24 felony counts of insurance fraud, seven felony counts of perjury under oath, and four felony counts of making fraudulent statements. Held on $39,000 bail heading into the hearing, Monzon could get up to 30 years in state prison with a conviction, according to the Orange County District Attorney's office (OCDA).

Monzon lost his balance while working for Fermol Inc. in Huntington Beach on April 19, 2010, when he dropped a large piece of granite that landed on his right thigh and knee and broke. He was placed on temporary total disability and received more than $24,000 in TTD benefits, reporting to doctors that he was unable to work as a result of the injuries he suffered and has limited physical abilities, prosecutors say.

But Monzon actually kept working as a granite installer on a new job--while illegally continuing to accept disability benefits, according to the OCDA. .He is accused of making matters worse for himself on Jan. 30, 2013, when he allegedly lied in a deposition. According to prosecutors, Monzon claimed under oath to: not have worked since the date of the injury; only earn income from TTD benefits; have not worked since April 11, 2012; not have performed any activities involving granite since the date of the injury; not to have loaded or unloaded any granite since the date of the injury; to not have lifted anything over 5 pounds since the date of the injury; and not using a grinder, sander or buffer since the date of the injury.

But a California Department of Insurance investigation produced video evidence of Monzon "working on manual labor projects similar to those performed prior to his injury," the OCDA say. Arrested by sheriff's deputies, Monzon allegedly earned more than $54,000 from a new business while illegally receiving and cashing disability checks ...

Jeff Sinclair worked for Praxair Inc. collecting and testing soil, water, and air samples from potentially contaminated sites. During his employment, he underwent annual physical examinations. Several of his annual physical examinations after 1993 showed he had high blood urea nitrogen and creatinine levels and the examiner noted he should follow up with his own physician. Although Sinclair received copies of all of his annual examination results, he never reviewed them and, therefore, never complied with the recommendation to follow up with his personal physician. Nonetheless, his personal physician diagnosed him with renal disease in 1994 and he admittedly knew of the diagnosis at least since 1996. At the time, his physician attributed his renal disease to gout.

In 2009, after another annual examination, he was diagnosed with stage IV renal failure and became disabled from work. A worker's compensation qualified medical examiner determined 85 percent of the cause of his renal disease was from work-related chemical exposures.

The Sinclairs subsequently sued Praxair for intentional conduct violating public policy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and loss of consortium. Their complaint principally alleged Praxair intentionally concealed that workplace chemical exposures both caused and aggravated Sinclair's renal disease. Praxair moved for summary judgment, arguing the Sinclairs could not establish their claims fell within the fraudulent concealment exception to the workers' compensation exclusivity doctrine because, among other reasons, Sinclair knew he had renal disease. The superior court agreed and granted summary judgment to Praxair.

The Court of Appeal affirmed in the unpublished case of Sinclair v Praxair Inc.

An employee injured during the course of employment is generally limited to remedies available under the Workers' Compensation Act. Labor Code section 3602(b)(2) provides a narrow exception to this exclusivity rule and allows a civil suit '[w]here the employee's injury is aggravated by the employer's fraudulent concealment of the existence of the injury and its connection with the employment, in which case the employer's liability shall be limited to those damages proximately caused by the aggravation . . . .' This provision was enacted in 1982 and codifies the common law fraudulent concealment exception that was enunciated by the Supreme Court in Johns-Manville Products Corp. v. Superior Court (1980) 27 Cal.3d 465.

Three conditions are necessary for the fraudulent concealment exception to apply: (1) the employer must have concealed the existence of the injury; (2) the employer must have concealed the connection between the injury and the employment; and (3) the injury must have been aggravated following the concealment. If any one of these conditions is lacking, the exception does not apply and the employer is entitled to judgment in its favor.

Here, the undisputed evidence shows Sinclair was diagnosed with renal disease in 1994 and he knew of the diagnosis as early as 1996. Consequently, the Sinclairs cannot establish the first element of the fraudulent concealment exception, that Praxair concealed the existence of his injury from him ...

NBC Sports reports that three lawsuits filed by retired NHL players over concussion-related injuries have been consolidated and will be heard by a federal judge in Minnesota. A special panel assigned the cases Tuesday to U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson of St. Paul. The order says Minnesota provides a central location for parties and witnesses, including those from Canada. It consolidates lawsuits filed by more than 200 former players in Minnesota, New York and Washington. It notes that Nelson is already presiding over one of the cases. The order says two similar cases pending in Minnesota and New York may be added later.

The lawsuits are similar to those on behalf of ex-NFL players, which resulted in an $870 million settlement. The NCAA agreed to a $70 million settlement in another concussion lawsuit.

The NHL has been hit with five different concussion lawsuits since November of 2013, when the first group of 10 ex-players filed in a federal court in Washington. The second was filed in April - one that included former NHLers Dan LaCouture, Dan Keczmer and Mike Peluso, but one that also lost credibility by claiming NHL legend Gordie Howe died in 2009 from a neurodegenerative disease called Pick’s disease.

The third suit was also filed in April, in Minneapolis, by retired players Dave Christian, Reed Larson and William Bennett. Lawsuits No. 4 and No. 5 were filed this past summer and featured former Former Bruins d-man Jon Rohloff, ex-Columbus forward Dan Fritsche and former Ranger Chris Ferraro.

The consolidation order says all five suits may eventually be joined into one ...

The Commission on Health and Safety and Workers' Compensation (CHSWC) has released on its website the 214 page study, "Examination of the California Public Sector Self-Insured Workers' Compensation Program" for public comment. This study was part of Senate Bill (SB) 863 Reforms, required by Labor Code Section 3702.4, to examine the public sector self-insured workers' compensation program and to make recommendations to improve the administration and performance of the program. CHSWC contracted with Bickmore to assist with this requirement.

Recent municipal bankruptcies have drawn attention to public entity employers and the adequacy of the resources they possess to meet their workers’ compensation obligations. It is unclear what the impact to employees and taxpayers would be in the event that large or multiple public entities become unable to provide for their workers’ compensation liabilities.The purpose of this study is to identify variances in the performance of public employers’ self insured workers’ compensation and to recommend areas for improvement. In addition, the study is to provide information that facilitates benchmarking public self-insured workers’ compensation programs.

The study found that a self-insurer’s region has a significant impact on the claims costs. Self-insurers in southern California have experienced higher claim frequency, higher average claim size, and higher overall cost per $100 of payroll. Over the past several years this disparity between southern California and the rest of the State has increased. In addition, claims of southern California self-insurers tend to stay open longer in comparison to those in the rest of the State. The analysis of insurance company data by the California Workers’ Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau (WCIRB) has also pointed to disparities between claim frequencies and costs between different regions of the State. The current analysis confirms that these disparities also exist for public self-insurers. Since one of the goals of the workers’ compensation system to have equal treatment of and benefits for injured workers, the authors believe it is worth exploring the root causes of this disparity.

The type of agency has a major impact on the loss rates, claims sizes, and claims frequencies. Municipalities tend to have the highest costs, whereas educational entities (schools, colleges, and universities) have the lowest. Over the past several years the cost of municipal claims has risen at a faster pace than that of counties or educational entities. This is primarily due to increases in the average claim size. Also, claims of education self-insurers tend to close faster in comparison to those of counties and cities.

In general, JPAs have experienced lower costs per $100 of payroll than individual self-insurers. However, JPA costs have been increasing at a faster rate than those of individual self-insurers over the past several years.

The study found almost no difference in loss rates between self-insurers that utilize a TPA versus those that self-administer. Those that self-administer tend to have a higher claim frequency, but this is offset by a lower average claim size. In addition, loss rates have been increasing at a slower pace for those that self-administer than for those that utilize a TPA ...

The Division of Workers’ Compensation has issued a notice of public hearing to revise the recently amended hospital outpatient departments and ambulatory surgical centers (HOPD/ASC) fee schedule. The public hearing has been scheduled for 10 a.m., September 18, in the Auditorium of the Elihu Harris Building, 1515 Clay Street, Oakland, CA 94612. Members of the public may also submit written comment on the regulations until 5 p.m. that day.

As set forth in Labor Code section 5307.1(c)(1), the maximum facility fee for services performed in a hospital outpatient department, shall not exceed 120 percent of the fee paid by Medicare for the same services performed in a hospital outpatient department. Senate Bill 863 also required that for services rendered in ambulatory surgical centers on or after January 1, 2013, the maximum facility fee shall not exceed 80 percent of the fee paid by Medicare for the same services performed in a hospital outpatient department. Effective Jan. 1, 2013, the Acting Administrative Director amended the HOPD/ASC fee schedule (Title 8, California Code of Regulations, sections 9789.30 et seq.), to implement Senate Bill 863 as it relates to the OMFS HOPD/ASC fee schedule. Effective Jan. 1, 2004, the Administrative Director adopted the HOPD/ASC fee schedule (Title 8, California Code of Regulations, sections 9789.30 et seq.), which is updated annually by Administrative Director Order.

The objective of this rulemaking action is to amend the OMFS HOPD/ASC fee schedule to correct the payment methodology for “Other Services” that are paid according to the RBRVS Practice Expense relative value units. The RBRVS conversion factor should be applied in the payment methodology instead of the HOPD/ASC Workers’ Compensation Multiplier that was adopted by the HOPD/ASC fee schedule regulations. Correcting the payment methodology to include the application of the RBRVS conversion factor is beneficial because payment would otherwise be incorrectly calculated.

The notice and text of the regulation can be found on the proposed regulations page ...

Jacob Richard Bonzer, 27, formerly of Lake Forest, California was arrested this month in Chicago by the Chicago Police Department and a U.S. Marshals Task Force on 96 felony counts including grand theft, forgery and denial of benefits. If convicted, Bonzer faces a maximum sentence of more than 87 years in state prison. "Bonzer allegedly created more than a thousand insurance policies based on fraudulent information, which allowed him to collect $285,000 in unearned commission payments," said Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones.

A joint investigation between the California Department of Insurance, the Orange County District Attorney's Office and the Brea Police Department revealed Bonzer perpetrated several schemes for his personal financial gain.

Investigators discovered that in 2012 Bonzer created a fictitious insurance company called GW Mutual Risk Retention Group, LLC, which was registered in Florida. GW Mutual is not licensed to write insurance in California though Bonzer sold workers' compensation and commercial insurance policies through his agency, Bonzer Insurance Brokerage, located in Orange County. Bonzer collected approximately $280,000 in premium from 58 California businesses that believed they were purchasing valid coverage. When questioned by a client about GW's ability to offer insurance in California, Bonzer provided an altered CDI report of examination as proof. Department investigators also discovered premium payments entrusted to Bonzer were used on personal living expenses including the rental of luxury high-rise apartments, travel, wine clubs and fine dining.

"The fact Bonzer's criminal activity left legitimate businesses without valid workers' compensation insurance put business owners, their employees and the state at great financial risk. His multiple schemes to rip off insurers and businesses are egregious," said Commissioner Jones.

Bonzer also submitted 128 fraudulent homeowners insurance applications containing bogus information using nonexistent policyholders for real properties, causing valid policies to be issued for phantom homeowners in escrow between April and July 2010. Bonzer received $46,000 in advanced commissions from the insurance company that expected to collect premiums when the properties closed escrow. Since the applicants were bogus, the insurer never received premium payments and Bonzer was eventually fired. Investigators allege Bonzer continued his scam through another agent after he was fired. It was determined Bonzer created a fictitious mortgage company that referred all residential short-sale business to Bonzer for homeowners insurance. Bonzer used the same scheme leading the insurer to believe they would receive premium payments at the close of escrow. Numerous policies were resubmitted multiple times with an explanation that escrow closing had been delayed. In some cases Bonzer received duplicate commission payments for the same property. Between August 2010 and November 2011, approximately 790 fraudulent homeowners insurance applications, containing bogus information, were submitted by Bonzer under another agent. As a result Bonzer received commission payments of $239,000.

Bonzer orchestrated these elaborate scams by using multiple post office boxes, virtual assistants, business entities, office spaces, email accounts, Website domains and bank accounts. The department has reason to believe that there are additional victims. Anyone who did business with Jacob Bonzer or believe they may be a victim, are encouraged to contact Department of Insurance supervising investigator Vera Grunke at (714) 712-7600 ...

"Doctor shopping," the growing practice of obtaining narcotic prescriptions from multiple providers, has led to measurable increases in drug use among postoperative trauma patients. The study, "Narcotic Use and Postoperative Doctor Shopping in the Orthopaedic Trauma Population," appearing in the August issue of the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery(JBJS), links doctor shopping to higher narcotic use among orthopaedic patients. The data was presented earlier this year at the 2014 Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons(AAOS).

"There has been an alarming rise in opioid use in our country, and the diversion of opioids for non-therapeutic uses is dramatically increasing," said lead study author, orthopaedic surgeon Brent J. Morris, MD. "Many suspect that orthopaedic trauma patients may be at a higher risk for pre-injury narcotic use and 'doctor shopping.'"

Researchers reviewed prescription records for 151 adult patients admitted to an orthopaedic unit at a Level 1 trauma center between January and December 2011. Using the Tennessee Controlled Substance Monitoring Database (CSMD), the study authors reviewed data on narcotic prescriptions obtained three months before, and within six months after, each patient's orthopaedic procedure. The research found that 20.8 percent of patients sought prescription pain medications from multiple providers. When compared to patients who continued to receive prescriptions and care from a single provider, the "doctor shoppers":

1) Used narcotics four times longer than single provider patients (112 days versus 28 days).
2) Obtained a median of seven narcotic prescriptions compared to two prescriptions for single provider patients.
3) Had a higher morphine equivalent dose (MED) of narcotics each day (43 milligrams versus 26 milligrams).
4) Were 4.5 times more likely to seek out an additional provider if they had a history of preoperative narcotic use.

The "doctor shopping" patients had an average age of 39.6 ±12.2 years, and were primarily white (89 percent) and male (63 percent). Forty-four percent were uninsured. There were no differences between the single-provider and multiple-provider groups with regard to age, sex, race, injury type, distance between the patient's home and treating hospital, tobacco use, psychiatric history (depression, anxiety, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, or bipolar disorder), or comorbidities. "Our study determined that one out of five of our orthopaedic trauma patients obtained narcotic prescriptions from another provider after surgery while still receiving narcotic prescriptions from the treating surgeon," said Dr. Morris.

The negative consequences of narcotic use and diversion of narcotics for nonmedical use in the United States are growing at dramatic rates Americans consume 80% of the global opioid supply and 99% of the global hydrocodone supply. The alarming rise in unintentional overdose deaths in the United States, which increased 124% from 1999 to 2007, is largely due to increases in prescription narcotic overdoses. Up to 20% of prescription drug abusers receive their narcotic supply from a single physician prescriber, while a growing percentage obtains narcotic prescriptions by seeking multiple providers ("doctor shopping") ...

The Division of Workers’ Compensation has posted a first 15-day notice of modification to the proposed Medical Treatment Utilization Schedule (MTUS) regulations to the DWC website. Members of the public are invited to present written comments regarding the proposed modifications to dwcrules@dir.ca.gov until 5 p.m. on August 30.

The MTUS is established as the standard for the provision of medical care in the workers’ compensation system in accordance with Labor Code section 4600. The proposed amendments to the MTUS clarify the scientific process by which evidence-based clinical decisions are to be made when the MTUS is silent on a particular issue and describe how the MTUS may be rebutted pursuant to Labor Code section 4604.5.

The proposed regulations detail the methods to evaluate medical evidence according to an explicit, systematic, strength-of-evidence methodology to determine recommendations that are supported with the best available evidence. The intent of these regulations is to enable workers to achieve appropriate care that is supported by the best available medical evidence. The proposed modifications include:

1) Revision of the definition of "ACOEM" by deleting the reference to the second edition 2004 version and adding a brief description of what the guidelines contain.
2) Revision of the definition of "chronic pain" by adding a three month timeline from the initial onset of pain for clarity.
3) Deletion of the definition of "MEDLINE" because this term is no longer used in the regulations.
4) Modification of the definition of "Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) Instrument" by adding the May 2009 AGREE II version was adopted and incorporated by reference into the MTUS by the Administrative Director and a copy may be obtained from DWC’s website or by written request to DWC’s Medical Unit.
5) Re-organization and re-wording to express that medical care shall be in accordance with the best available medical evidence when the MTUS’s presumption of evidence is challenged pursuant to Labor Code section 4604.5 or when there is a topical gap and a medical treatment or diagnostic test is not addressed by the recommended guidelines set forth in the MTUS.
6) Clarification that treating physicians may apply the medical literature search sequence, and specifies when Utilization Review physicians and Independent Medical Review physicians shall apply the medical literature search sequence to find the best available medical evidence.
7) Specifies when and by whom the MTUS Hierarchy of Evidence for Different Clinical Questions shall be applied and how the levels of evidence shall be documented in a Utilization Review decision and in an Independent Medical Review decision.

There was a public hearing on this regulations in July. The transcript reflects the testimony of seven individuals who had comments about the MTUS regulatory proposals. Ken Eichler, an official with the Official Disability Guidelines (ODG) was in "full support" of these guidelines. He was however concerned about who was required to rank the evidence. Steve Cattolica, a spokesman for medical providers had similar concerns.

The notice and text of the regulations can be found on the proposed regulations page ...

The former owner of a Los Angeles medical clinic management company pleaded guilty in connection with his role in a scheme to defraud Medicare.

Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Acting U.S. Attorney Stephanie Yonekura of the Central District of California and Assistant Director in Charge Bill L. Lewis of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office made the announcement.

Mihran "Mike" Meguerian, 37, of Glendale, California, pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Beverly R. O’Connell in the Central District of California to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud.

According to court documents, Meguerian owned Med Serve Management (Med Serve), a medical clinic management company located in Van Nuys, California. Meguerian admitted that from approximately July 2008 through February 2009, he engaged in a conspiracy to commit health care fraud, in part through the operation of Med Serve. Meguerian admitted that he oversaw medical clinics that wrote prescriptions for medically unnecessary power wheelchairs and other durable medical equipment (DME). Meguerian and his co-conspirators then sold the prescriptions to DME supply companies, knowing that the prescriptions were fraudulent. The DME supply companies submitted the fraudulent prescriptions to Medicare in false and fraudulent claims.

From approximately July 2008 through February 2009, DME supply companies submitted approximately $3,367,661 in fraudulent claims to Medicare using fraudulent prescriptions from Meguerian’s clinics, and Medicare paid approximately $1,438,760 for those claims. Meguerian’s sentencing is scheduled for Nov. 17, 2014.

This case was investigated by the FBI and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, which is supervised by the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. This case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Fred Medick and Blanca Quintero of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section.

Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, now operating in nine cities across the country, has charged more than 1,900 defendants who have collectively billed the Medicare program more than $6 billion. In addition, HHS’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with HHS-OIG, are taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers ...

Florida’s workers’ compensation law is unconstitutional, according to a ruling by a Miami-Dade judge on Wednesday, striking a severe blow to a law already under attack. No doubt this case has caught the attention of applicant attorneys nationwide, and the ruling may very well be a precursor to challenges here in California.

The Bradenton Herald reports that Circuit Judge Jorge Cueto declared Florida’s long-disputed workers’ compensation law unconstitutional; adding that after several years where state legislatures diminished medical care and wage-loss benefits for incapacitated workers, the statute now violates "fundamental" rights of employees. The case is based on a government office worker in Miami-Dade County who claims the nearly 80-year-old law forces injured workers into Florida’s legal system, which is so flawed it cannot provide adequate medical care or dollars to supplant lost wages. "The benefits in the act have been so decimated," says Cueto’s decision, "that it no longer provides a reasonable alternative" to filing suit in civil court.

The ruling comes at a critical time for Florida’s blue-collar and agricultural workers. Lawmakers and business leaders claim that rising workers’ compensation premiums threaten to disrupt economic growth; worker advocates argue the state allows widespread insurance fraud, while responding to high premiums by penalizing workers.

Workers’ comp reform is a years-long controversy, becoming more prominent as worker rights attorneys ask judges as far as the Florida Supreme Court, to strike down;the state law permanently.

Cueto’s ruling centers on an accounting clerk who, on Jan. 27, 2012, tripped in a walkway because a co-worker left boxes around the floor. Elsa Padgett, who had already approached retirement age, fell on her hip, sustaining serious shoulder damage as well. After shoulder replacement surgery, Padgett continued to suffer pain, which eventually forced her to retire.

If the ruling is appealed, Cueto’s order joins a minimum of two other cases challenging the constitutionality of parts of the state workers’ compensation statute.The Florida Supreme Court is already considering an appeal filed by Bradley Westphal, a St. Petersburg firefighter with severe and disabling back injuries incurred in 2009. After temporary wage-loss benefits had expired, Westphal was left with no income. Doctors through his insurance carrier said he could not seek work, and the insurance carrier refused to provide benefits until doctors confirmed he would no longer improve medically.

"This system of redress does not comport with any notion of natural justice, and its result is repugnant to fundamental fairness, because it relegates a severely injured worker to a legal twilight zone of economic and familial ruin," said the February 2013 opinion from a three-judge Tallahassee appeals court striking down the statute. Later, the full court restored the law, but the case is now before the state’s highest court.

Florida lawmakers amended state law in 1968, making the workers’ comp system the "exclusive" legal remedy when employees are injured on the job. At that time, the law was far more generous, requiring employers to pay all medical bills and considerably better benefits to workers who lost either all or part of their ability to work. However, the Legislature made changes in 1990, 1993 and 2003 removing large portions of injured workers’ benefits. Lawmakers justified the reductions as necessary to keep Florida competitive with other states, to retain or lure business. Since revisions to the law made in 2003, premiums dropped 56 percent.

Attorney General Pam Bondi chose not to intervene directly in Cueto’s case, but her office defended the statute, maintaining, "While some individual workers may be worse off with workers’ compensation in a particular instance, others benefit greatly."

In his order, Cueto said lawmakers had violated their side of the "trade" with workers - where employees relinquish the right to sue in civil court after an injury, but then get fast, efficient and no-fault justice. Business interests began carving up the safety net in place in 1968, when employers reached the bargain. "The purpose of a workers’ compensation act is not for it to be used as a weapon in an economic civil war," Cueto concluded. "Its purpose is to provide adequate compensation for on-the-job injuries in place" of a worker’s ability to sue in civil court ...

Eleven armed FBI agents crept around a stone-and-glass house here just before dawn. An AR-15 rifle and four other guns were registered to the man in the house. "FBI warrant," the agents called out, and a man in a T-shirt and shorts emerged. It was no drug lord. The target was a doctor who moonlighted as a movie producer with an Alec Baldwin comedy to his credit. The Justice Department charged the Southern California doctor, Robert A. Glazer, with writing prescriptions and certifications resulting in $33 million of fraudulent Medicare claims. The raid in May capped a year-long investigation by the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, a joint effort by the Justice Department and Department of Health and Human Services.

The story in the Wall Street Journal says that many strike-force investigations, including the Glazer case, start with an agent behind a computer screen, eyeing page after page of Medicare claims data, looking for unusual billing patterns. The Glazer case comes as the strike force increasingly targets physicians. "You need a doctor in all the schemes," said David A. O'Neil, a deputy assistant attorney general for the criminal division who supervises strike-force prosecutions. He said the team charged 36 doctors with health-care fraud in the 2013 fiscal year, compared with just three in 2007, when many cases dug into fraud involving durable medical equipment such as wheelchairs.

The strike force's Los Angeles team includes about 20 investigators and prosecutors working out of multiple offices, including a shiny tower in the suburbs near a strip mall dotted with family restaurants and chain stores. Last fiscal year, the strike force's nine offices charged 350 people with health-care fraud, up from 122 charged when the strike force had just two offices. One agent described dealing with the voluminous number of potential cases as "Whac-A-Mole."

Dr. Glazer attracted attention from authorities long before this year's charges. In 1994, he was indicted with six others for an alleged referral scheme between 1986 and 1993. He was accused of paying $73,454 to a marketer during one 3½-year stretch to send him patients, according to California Superior Court documents obtained through a public-records request. Court documents indicate that the case was dismissed after a judge ruled that the prosecution's witness testimony was inadmissible. Dr. Glazer was never excluded from billing Medicare, but patient complaints over billing prompted CMS several years ago to place him on "prepayment review," according to people familiar with the situation. That meant any claims made to Medicare were manually reviewed by CMS contractors, a measure intended to prevent improper billing. Dr. Glazer was removed from the review list around 2009, these people said, although it isn't clear whether CMS decided to take him off or if he appealed to an administrative judge. CMS said it doesn't comment on administrative actions against individual providers. It is difficult to permanently ban a provider from Medicare. A criminal conviction or a loss of a state medical license can provide grounds to take a provider out of the system, and CMS can revoke billing privileges for reasons such as failing to comply with Medicare rules. Since 2011, CMS has revoked about 20,000 providers. But a provider can eventually appeal or reapply to return to the program.

The strike force began investigating him after sorting through years of his payment claims in the Medicare database, according to people familiar with the investigation. Such database searches look for "the sort of medically impossible or medically unlikely scenario," said Supervisory Special Agent Robin McIlroy, who oversees the FBI's part of the strike force. Between 2006 and 2014, Dr. Glazer's family practice billed Medicare about $2 million, according to an affidavit by FBI Special Agent Janine Li, who was part of the investigation team. Between 2006 and 2014, Dr. Glazer's family practice billed Medicare about $2 million, according to an affidavit by FBI Special Agent Janine Li, who was part of the investigation team.

When agents cross-referenced his Medicare provider number with other parts of the database - including claims data for home-health agencies, hospice and durable medical equipment - large billing numbers stood out, according to a person familiar with the investigation. "Once you start crunching the data, you start to see everything," said Mr. Ferry, the special agent-in-charge. In the same eight-year time period, Dr. Glazer's referrals to home health-care companies resulted in billings to Medicare for $16.5 million, and referrals to medical-equipment companies resulted in billings of about $5.4 million, the FBI's Ms. Li said in her affidavit. Hospice services added up to about $10 million, according to a person familiar with the case.

Outliers popped up in the data. Using Dr. Glazer's prescriptions, Medicare paid $2.5 million to one home-health agency down the hall from his office, while a local hospice was the recipient of nearly all his referrals, according to the person familiar with the case. Generally referrals are more spread out between multiple providers, said a person familiar with health-care fraud. The volume of motorized-wheelchair prescriptions in the data stunned the agents—an average of 134 a year, compared with a typical doctor working with elderly people who prescribed as few as one or two, according to the affidavit.

As the investigation progressed, agents in unmarked cars drove to Dr. Glazer's clinic in Hollywood and watched. Located in a strip mall, along with a Salvadoran fast-food restaurant, a check cashier and a medical-supply company, the office received many elderly patients who spoke English as a second language, said the people familiar with the investigation. The agents interviewed patients drawn from the data, and a common allegation emerged: Dr. Glazer was billing Medicare for patient services sometimes never rendered and farming out patients to other providers, according to the indictment ...

The WCIRB Governing Committee voted to authorize the WCIRB to submit a January 1, 2015 Advisory Pure Premium Rate Filing to the California Insurance Commissioner.

The Filing will propose advisory pure premium rates that average $2.86 per $100 of payroll, which is $0.29 or 11.4% greater than the corresponding industry average filed pure premium rate of $2.57 as of July 1, 2014, and $0.18 or 6.7% greater than the average January 1, 2014 advisory pure premium rate of $2.68. The proposed average pure premium rate reflects a deterioration of $0.12 or 4.4% from the WCIRB’s indicated January 1, 2014 average pure premium rate reflected in the WCIRB’s amended January 1, 2014 Pure Premium Rate Filing.

Chief Actuary Dave Bellusci cited several factors that are driving this deterioration in the indicated pure premium including:

1) Continued adverse medical loss development
2) More complete recognition of long-term medical paid loss development patterns
3) Continued high levels of indemnity claim frequency
4) Higher than anticipated loss adjustment expense inflation in part attributed to less than projected frictional costs savings resulting from Senate Bill No. 863 (2012)
5) Lower wage growth than the original forecast
6) Increase in indicated experience rating plan off-balance

The Filing reflects statewide loss and loss adjustment expense experience valued as of March 31, 2014; however, Mr. Bellusci advised the Committee that the WCIRB will continue monitoring insurer experience and may amend the Filing once it has analyzed experience valued as of June 30, 2014.

The WCIRB will submit its January 1, 2015 Pure Premium Rate Filing to the California Department of Insurance (CDI) on or around August 18, 2014. The CDI will schedule a public hearing to consider the Filing and once the Notice of Proposed Action and Notice of Public Hearing is issued, the WCIRB will post a copy in the Regulatory Filings section of the website (www.wcirb.com) ...