Page   1
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
                     before the iowa industrial commissioner
 
            ____________________________________________________________
 
                                          :
 
            JOHN F. BLANCHARD,            :
 
                                          :
 
                 Claimant,                :
 
                                          :
 
            vs.                           :
 
                                          :      File No.  867353
 
            DECKER TRUCK LINES,           :
 
                                          :  A R B I T R A T I O N
 
                 Employer,                :
 
                                          :      D E C I S I O N
 
            and                           :
 
                                          :
 
            LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE,     :
 
                                          :
 
                 Insurance Carrier,       :
 
                 Defendants.              :
 
            ___________________________________________________________
 
            
 
                                   introduction
 
            
 
                 This is a proceeding in arbitration brought by John F. 
 
            Blanchard, claimant, against Decker Truck Lines, employer, 
 
            and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, insurance carrier, 
 
            defendants, for benefits as the result of an injury that 
 
            occurred on October 5, 1987.  A hearing was held in Fort 
 
            Dodge, Iowa, on April 4, 1990, and the case was fully 
 
            submitted at the close of the hearing.  Claimant was 
 
            represented by Monte L. Fisher.  Defendants were represented 
 
            by Tito Trevino.  
 
            
 
                 The record consists of the testimony of John F. 
 
            Blanchard, claimant; Kelly Blanchard, claimant's wife; 
 
            defendants' exhibits 1 through 11; pages 1 through 5 and 
 
            page 18 of defendants' exhibit 12; and defendants' exhibits 
 
            13, 16, and 17.  Claimant's exhibits 1 through 11 were 
 
            withdrawn because they were duplicates of defendants' 
 
            exhibits 1 through 11.  Claimant's exhibit 12, the medical 
 
            bills, was excluded at defendants' objection because they 
 
            were not timely served and did not appear on a timely served 
 
            exhibit list as required by paragraph seven of the hearing 
 
            assignment order.  Defendants withdrew their exhibit 14.  
 
            Defendants' exhibit 15 was excluded at claimant's objection 
 
            because it was a deposition taken from claimant and claimant 
 
            was available to testify at the hearing.  Defendants' 
 
            exhibits 16 and 17 were offered, taken and received into 
 
            evidence at the hearing, claimant stated that he had no 
 
            objection to these exhibits, and therefore, these exhibits 
 
            were admitted into evidence and are admitted into evidence 
 
            at this time even though the deputy failed to make that 
 
            comment at the time of the hearing on the record.  Claimant 
 
            presented a description of disputes at the time of the 
 
            hearing.  The deputy ordered a transcript of the hearing.  
 

 
            
 
            Page   2
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            Claimant's attorney submitted a posthearing brief.  
 
            Defendants' attorney did not submit a posthearing brief.
 
            
 
                                preliminary matter
 
            
 
                 In an earlier injury on October 31, 1985, claimant 
 
            sustained an acute lumbosacral (low back) strain while 
 
            lifting a 125-pound paving form while working for Giese 
 
            Construction.  A CT scan and myelogram were normal, but 
 
            Samir Wahby, M.D., an orthopedic surgeon, awarded claimant a 
 
            5 percent permanent impairment for the reason that claimant 
 
            might have a recurrence of low back pain.  William R. 
 
            Boulden, M.D., said that claimant had no permanent 
 
            impairment because of the negative CT scan and myelogram.  
 
            Deputy Industrial Michael G. Trier determined that claimant 
 
            had sustained a 5 percent functional impairment to the body 
 
            as a whole and that he sustained a 10 percent loss of 
 
            earning capacity as a result of the injury sustained on 
 
            October 31, 1985.  Blanchard v. Giese Construction, file 
 
            number 811621 (filed December 23, 1987).  Official notice is 
 
            taken of this decision.  [Iowa Administrative Procedure Act 
 
            17A.14(4)].
 
            
 
                 In this case, the parties stipulated that claimant 
 
            sustained an injury to his low back which occurred on 
 
            October 5, 1987, which arose out of and in the course of 
 
            employment with Decker Truck Lines.  
 
            
 
                 In a later injury Deputy Industrial Commissioner 
 
            Elizabeth A. Nelson determined that claimant sustained an 
 
            injury to his low back on June 23, 1989, while working for 
 
            Omaha Cold Storage Company.  Claimant was awarded temporary 
 
            disability benefits and his medical expenses.  Deputy Nelson 
 
            did not award any permanent partial disability for the 
 
            reason that claimant had not given Dr. Boulden a complete 
 
            history and failed to disclose still another episode of low 
 
            back pain which occurred while claimant was working for 
 
            Crouse Cartage Company in May of 1988 after the Decker 
 
            injury and before the Omaha Cold Storage injury.  Because of 
 
            this she was not able to determine whether claimant's 
 
            disability was attributable to the Crouse injury or the 
 
            Omaha Cold Storage injury.  Blanchard v. Omaha Cold Storage, 
 
            file number 931382 (filed February 26, 1991).  Official 
 
            notice is taken of this decision.  [Iowa Administrative 
 
            Procedure Act 17A.14(4)].
 
            
 
                 Two issues which appear on the hearing assignment order 
 
            (1) time off work and (2) section 85.23, were withdrawn by 
 
            the parties at the time of the hearing.
 
            
 
                                      issues
 
            
 
                 The parties submitted the following issues for 
 
            determination at the time of the hearing:
 
            
 
                 Whether the injury was the cause of additional 
 
            temporary disability from July 1, 1989 to October 12, 1989.  
 
            
 
                 Whether claimant is entitled to additional temporary 
 
            disability benefits for this period of time.
 

 
            
 
            Page   3
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
                 Whether the injury was a cause of permanent disability.
 
            
 
                 Whether claimant is entitled to permanent disability 
 
            benefits, and if so, the extent of benefits to which he is 
 
            entitled.
 
            
 
                 Whether claimant is entitled to medical benefits, and 
 
            if so, the extent of medical benefits to which he is 
 
            entitled.  
 
            
 
                                 findings of fact
 
            
 
            causal connection-temporary disability-permanent disability
 
            
 
                 It is determined that the injury of October 5, 1987, 
 
            was the cause of both additional temporary disability and 
 
            permanent disability.
 
            
 
                 First, it should be noted that after the Giese injury 
 
            on October 31, 1985, which was diagnosed as a strain, both a 
 
            CT scan and a myelogram disclosed no objective evidence of 
 
            serious injury to claimant's lower back.  
 
            
 
                 Claimant worked for Decker from September 22, 1986 (ex. 
 
            12, p. 1) until February 19, 1988 (tr. p. 84).
 
            
 
                 Claimant testified that on October 5, 1987, while 
 
            working for Decker, he injured his low back while he was 
 
            manually, with both hands, cranking down a flatbed trailer 
 
            loaded with wall board to connect it with the fifth wheel of 
 
            his tractor.  He further testified that it takes a lot of 
 
            force to manually operate this crank and he felt a burning 
 
            sensation in his back.  Nevertheless, he continued to 
 
            Morris, Illinois, where he was forced to quit driving and 
 
            was taken to the hospital by ambulance.   
 
            
 
                 Claimant was treated at the Morris Hospital from 
 
            October 5, 1987 to October 7, 1987, by C.M. Cumba, M.D., and 
 
            Joseph Kannankeril, M.D., an orthopedic surgeon.  Dr. Cumba 
 
            reported that claimant could not move or walk at all.  
 
            Claimant was admitted for acute low back pain and was 
 
            diagnosed as having lumbar disc displacement.  A CAT scan of 
 
            the lumbar spine disclosed an L-4, L-5 prominent protrusion 
 
            with a herniated nucleus pulposus.  It also disclosed a 
 
            slight protrusion at L-3, L-4 and L-5, S-1 (exhibit 5, page 
 
            11).  Dr. Kannankeril contemplated a myelogram and other 
 
            definitive treatment (surgery), but claimant was transferred 
 
            by ambulance and private plane to Trinity Regional Hospital 
 
            at Fort Dodge on October 7, 1987.
 
            
 
                 Another CT scan at the Trinity Hospital disclosed disc 
 
            herniation on the left and centrally at the level of the 
 
            L4-5 disc.  Dr. Wahby contemplated a myelogram and a 
 
            possible lumbar laminectomy (ex. 4, p. 55), but claimant 
 
            stated that he did not want a myelogram, he had no pain and 
 
            he wanted to go home from the hospital and so he was 
 
            discharged on October 10, 1987 (ex. 4, p. 54).  However, 
 
            claimant was back in Dr. Wahby's office on October 15, 1987, 
 
            with considerable low back pain that radiated into his left 
 

 
            
 
            Page   4
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            lower extremity (ex. 3, p. 2).  
 
            
 
                 After the Decker injury and prior to the Omaha Cold 
 
            Storage claimant had another episode of back pain in May of 
 
            1988 while working for Crouse Cartage Company.  Dr. Wahby 
 
            recorded that claimant felt sharp pain getting out of the 
 
            truck, but claimant insisted that the pain was simply 
 
            brought on by driving and not by getting out of the truck.  
 
            When he asked for time off work to rest his back he was 
 
            fired (transcript p. 52).  Although claimant was referred by 
 
            Dr. Wahby to Robert A. Hayne, M.D., an orthopedic surgeon in 
 
            Des Moines, there is no evidence of any further medical 
 
            treatment for this episode of back pain by Dr. Wahby, Dr. 
 
            Hayne or anyone else (ex. 3, p. 3).  
 
            
 
                 On March 2, 1989, while claimant was driving for Omaha 
 
            Cold Storage, he was treated by John Grant, M.D., an 
 
            orthopedic surgeon.  Dr. Grant said claimant attributed this 
 
            pain to cranking down the trailer while working for Decker.  
 
            X-rays disclosed minimal narrowing of the L4-5 
 
            intervertebral disc space and spurring at L4-L5 and L5-S1 
 
            (ex. 8, pp. 1 & 2).
 
            
 
                 Then on June 23, 1989, while driving for Omaha Cold 
 
            Storage, claimant experienced another acute and 
 
            incapacitating episode of low back pain while driving to St. 
 
            Joseph, Missouri (tr. pp. 53-57).  Claimant was then treated 
 
            by Rodney E. Johnson, M.D., and Dr. Boulden.  Claimant was 
 
            admitted to Iowa Lutheran Hospital on July 18, 1989.  On 
 
            July 19, 1989, a CT scan of the lumbar spine showed a 
 
            prominent L4-L5 herniated disc centrally and slightly to the 
 
            right.  L5-S1 also showed a herniated disc to the right side 
 
            of the anterior canal (ex. 9, p. 3).  On July 21, 1989, Dr. 
 
            Boulden performed a bilateral diskectomy on L4-5 and a 
 
            diskectomy of L5-S1 on the right (ex. 9, p. 6).  
 
            
 
                 Dr. Wahby gave the opinion, "This patient does not have 
 
            any permanent disability from his October 5, 1987 injury." 
 
            (ex. 3, p. 11).  He explained in his deposition that this is 
 
            because he could not find any indication that the patient 
 
            had sustained any new injuries (ex. 17, p. 17).  Dr. Wahby's 
 
            opinion is obviously incorrect because after the Giese 
 
            injury in 1985, a CT scan and myelogram were normal and 
 
            claimant was diagnosed as only having a strain whereas after 
 
            the Decker injury in 1987, the CT scan at Morris Hospital 
 
            and Trinity Hospital both disclosed an intervertebral 
 
            herniated disc at L4-L5.  Dr. Wahby admitted to claimant's 
 
            counsel that a herniated disc will never heal itself (ex. 
 
            17, p. 20).  He admitted there was a permanent injury, but 
 
            he denied there was any permanent disability (ex. 17, p. 
 
            21).  
 
            
 
                 No explanation is offered for how Dr. Wahby determined 
 
            that claimant had sustained a 5 percent permanent impairment 
 
            after the Giese injury which was only a strain and a CT scan 
 
            and a myelogram produced no evidence of a herniated disc and 
 
            how he could determine that this injury resulted in no 
 
            permanent impairment when a CT scan at Morris Hospital and a 
 
            CT scan at Trinity Hospital disclosed a prominent herniated 
 
            disc at L4-L5 and a less serious disc bulging at L5-S1.
 

 
            
 
            Page   5
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
                 Although Dr. Boulden stated that claimant did not 
 
            sustain a permanent injury after the Giese injury on 
 
            December 31, 1985 (ex. 7, p. 2), he did determine that 
 
            claimant had a 15 percent permanent impairment after his 
 
            surgery in July of 1989 (ex. 7, p. 3).  After completing a 
 
            work hardening program Dr. Boulden determined that 
 
            claimant's work capacity rated out with a medium-heavy clas
 
            sification due to his back.  He further recommended that 
 
            claimant not return to truck driving and that job vocational 
 
            rehabilitation was in his best interest (ex. 7, pp. 4-6; ex. 
 
            16, pp. 4-6).  He added that claimant was restricted to 
 
            lifting 50-75 pounds occasionally and 40-50 pounds 
 
            frequently (ex. 16, p. 6).  
 
            
 
                 Dr. Boulden testified that his associate, Dr. Johnson, 
 
            felt that claimant's symptoms in 1989 (while working for 
 
            Omaha Cold Storage) were definitely attributable to the 
 
            ruptured disc which was first diagnosed in October 1987 
 
            (while working for Decker) (tr. p. 8).  Dr. Johnson ordered 
 
            a repeat CT scan which disclosed a ruptured disc at both 
 
            L4-5 and L5-S1.  Dr. Boulden said that claimant's continuing 
 
            to work as a truck driver, not necessarily one incident, was 
 
            the cause of claimant's worsened condition (ex. 16, p. 9).  
 
            
 
                 Dr. Boulden testified that within a reasonable degree 
 
            of medical certainty that he was able to determine a 
 
            permanent impairment rating for claimant for the injury of 
 
            October 5, 1987.  Dr. Boulden testified, "Based on the fact 
 
            of a proven disk protrusion by CT findings in '87 which had 
 
            not been present prior to that, I would have rated his back 
 
            out with a 5 percent disability with a proven disk - a 
 
            herniated disk, that had not been operated on."  (ex. 16, 
 
            pp. 11 & 12).  Dr. Boulden allocated the other 10 percent of 
 
            his 15 percent overall impairment rating to a continuation 
 
            of truck driving after the October 5, 1987, injury until 
 
            claimant became totally incapacitated in May of 1989 (ex. 
 
            16, p. 12).
 
            
 
                 Dr. Boulden's opinion about impairment for the injury 
 
            of October 5, 1987, is preferred over the opinion of Dr. 
 
            Wahby.  Rockwell Graphics Systems, Inc. v. Prince, 366 
 
            N.W.2d 187, 192 (Iowa 1985).  Dr. Boulden was not only a 
 
            treating physician, but he was the latest treating physician 
 
            and the surgeon who performed the surgery on claimant's 
 
            back.  Likewise, a doctor's expertise and board 
 
            certification may accord his testimony greater weight.  Dr. 
 
            Wahby is an orthopedic surgeon, but Dr. Boulden is a board 
 
            certified orthopedic surgeon  Reiland v. Palco, Inc., 
 
            Thirty-second Biennial Report of the Industrial Commissioner 
 
            56 (1985); Dickey v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 
 
            Thirty-fourth Biennial Report of the Industrial Commissioner 
 
            89 (1979).  In addition, Dr. Boulden's testimony is more 
 
            reasonable and comports best with all of the evidence in the 
 
            case.  Dr. Wahby admitted that claimant's herniated disc 
 
            would never heal itself and thus, it would appear that 
 
            claimant did receive a permanent impairment for this reason 
 
            alone.  Whether it was ratable or not in Dr. Wahby's opinion 
 
            is another matter.  Dr. Wahby's opinion that it did not 
 
            cause any disability is a matter which is more properly 
 

 
            
 
            Page   6
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            determined by the industrial commissioner.  Also, Dr. 
 
            Boulden's opinion comports more with agency expertise based 
 
            on numerous other back injuries of this nature.  [Iowa 
 
            Administrative Procedure Act 17A.14(5)].  
 
            
 
                 Claimant's contention that his major back problems all 
 
            stem from the rupture of the intervertebral disc at L4-L5 
 
            after cranking down the tailer loaded with wall board while 
 
            working for Decker on October 5, 1987, is corroborated by 
 
            the medical evidence.
 
            
 
                 Wherefore, it is determined from the medical evidence 
 
            alone that the injury of October 5, 1987, was the cause of 
 
            permanent disability.  Other evidence, which follows, also 
 
            confirms this determination.
 
            
 
                 It is further determined that the injury of October 5, 
 
            1987, was the cause of additional temporary disability for 
 
            the period stipulated to by the parties between July 1, 1989 
 
            and October 12, 1989, just prior to and after claimant's two 
 
            level, bilateral diskectomy by Dr. Boulden.  
 
            
 
                 Dr. Boulden testified, "I feel the fact that because of 
 
            the problem he had with his back and the continued working 
 
            as a truck driver is the leading candidate for him to have 
 
            the development of further problems." (ex. 16, p. 9).  
 
            
 
                 Dr. Boulden testified that claimant was not released to 
 
            return to truck driving, but he was released to go to 
 
            vocational rehabilitation to start looking for occupations 
 
            that meet the requirements of his restrictions (ex. 16, pp. 
 
            13 & 14).  When Dr. Boulden was asked if he knew of any 
 
            other traumas other than October 5, 1987, he responded:
 
            
 
                    As he reported to Dr. Johnson that he really 
 
                 didn't think of much that really happened other 
 
                 than he continued working, and that in itself, 
 
                 being a truck driver, with the condition of his 
 
                 spine something was going to happen, that someday 
 
                 he was probably going to have to have something 
 
                 done.  And it happened in 1989.
 
            
 
            (exhibit 16, pages 20 & 21)
 
            
 
                 Thus, the herniated disc which occurred on October 5, 
 
            1987, appears to be the initial, primary and continuing 
 
            reason for the surgery on July 21, 1989.  It became the 
 
            preexisting condition for the subsequent flare-ups that 
 
            claimant experienced while working for Crouse and Omaha Cold 
 
            Storage.  The episode of back pain while working for Crouse 
 
            in May of 1988 and the episode of back pain while working 
 
            for Omaha Cold Storage in June of 1989, are not associated 
 
            with any particular, separate and distinct incident or 
 
            traumatic event other than the continuing degeneration of 
 
            claimant's back which stems from the traumatic cranking 
 
            experience on October 5, 1987 that ruptured the L4-L5 disc. 
 
            But for this injury, claimant should have been able to drive 
 
            a truck and not have it result in subsequent surgery on July 
 
            21, 1989.  Dr. Wahby was not able to make a definite 
 
            statement as to whether claimant's herniated disc would 
 

 
            
 
            Page   7
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            become symptomatic if he continued to lead an active life 
 
            after the Decker injury.  Dr. Wahby testified, "You know, 
 
            that I can't, you know, answer that yes or no.  There is no 
 
            definite rule as far as that goes." (ex. 17, p. 20).  Again, 
 
            Dr. Boulden's opinion is preferred over Dr. Wahby's opinion 
 
            as to whether the injury of October 5, 1987, was a 
 
            substantial cause of the surgery performed on July 21, 1989, 
 
            and the time off work for it.
 
            
 
                 The radiographic report of the CT scan taken on July 
 
            19, 1989, of the lumbar spine just prior to the surgery 
 
            noted at that the L4-L5 level showed a prominent herniated 
 
            disc whereas the L5-S1 level only showed a herniated disc 
 
            (ex. 9, p. 3).  Thus, it would appear the major problem was 
 
            the L4-L5 disc herniation which occurred while working for 
 
            Decker on October 5, 1987.
 
            
 
                 Further causal connection of the injury of October 5, 
 
            1987, is found in these words of Dr. Wahby:
 
            
 
                 Q.  Okay.  I think from your answers to questions 
 
                 from Mr. Trevino there's a very definite 
 
                 herniation of a disk at the L4-5 level in October 
 
                 '87; correct?
 
            
 
                 A.  That's correct, and I so stated that. 
 
            
 
                 Q.  Right.  And that was--apparently there's no 
 
                 dispute that was attributable to some incident at 
 
                 work or from his work?
 
            
 
                 A.  Based on the histories, yes, I have no problem 
 
                 with that.
 
            
 
            (exhibit 16, pages 16 & 17)
 
            
 
                 Deputy Nelson related that when claimant returned from 
 
            St. Joseph, Missouri, after the Omaha Cold Storage injury, 
 
            that claimant stated to his employers that his back had 
 
            flared up again as a result of the Decker injury.
 
            
 
                 Claimant testified numerous times that the major injury 
 
            occurred on October 5, 1987, while working for Decker (tr. 
 
            pp. 48, 52, 63, and 87).  When claimant was asked about the 
 
            flare-up while working for Crouse in May of 1988, he 
 
            responded:
 

 
            
 
            Page   8
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
         
 
              A.  My honest opinion, Tito, is it was no different 
 
              from at Decker Truck Line when it first happened; it 
 
              just subsided and got worse, subsided, got worse, 
 
              subsided, got worse." 
 
         
 
              Q.  Is it any different than what you had after the 
 
              Giese injury, John?
 
         
 
              A.  Yes.  There's quite a bit of difference.
 
         
 
         (transcript page 91)
 
         
 
              Claimant further testified in response to questions as 
 
         follows:
 
         
 
              Q.  John, as I understand your testimony under cross 
 
              examination, the pain that you experienced on October 
 
              5, 1987, was distinct and different from the pain that 
 
              you had had from the Giese injury?
 
         
 
              A.  Yes, it was.
 
         
 
              Q.  And up until the time that you had to stop working 
 
              at Cold Storage and go have your surgery, is it your 
 
              testimony that you have no recollection of a separate 
 
              traumatic incident, a new injury, if you will, to your 
 
              back?
 
         
 
              A.  No.
 
         
 
         (transcript pages 95 & 96)
 
         
 
              Dr. Boulden testified that he operated in 1989 because 
 
         claimant's symptoms had persisted since 1987 (tr. p. 22).  
 
         
 
              Dr. Boulden concluded that it was claimant's last employment 
 
         for Omaha Cold Storage that necessitated the surgery and most of 
 
         his disability (ex. 16, pp. 25 & 26).  However, Deputy Nelson 
 
         disregarded Dr. Boulden's testimony on these two points for the 
 
         reason that Dr. Boulden did not have a complete history which 
 
         included the incident that occurred with Crouse Cartage Company.  
 
         Deputy Nelson stated:
 
         
 
                 Dr. Boulden based his opinion on the apportionment 
 
              for the permanent functional impairment on incomplete 
 
              information.  Dr. Boulden based his opinion on the 
 
              incorrect assumption that claimant had continuously 
 
              worked with on and off symptoms until 1989, when in 
 
              fact, claimant had been injured and incapacitated for 
 
              at least three months.  Without this information, Dr. 
 
              Boulden's assignment of liability for the second injury 
 
              is accorded no weight.
 
         
 
         (Blanchard v. Omaha Cold Storage, file 931382 pages 6 and 7 
 
         (Filed February 26, 1991)
 
         
 
              Deputy Nelson also concluded that Dr. Boulden proceeded on 
 
         the incorrect assumption that claimant continued to drive for the 
 
         entire 20-month period between the Decker injury and the Omaha 
 

 
         
 
         Page òòò  9        
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
         Cold Storage injury as a driver for Omaha Cold Storage.  
 
         (Blanchard, file 931382, footnote on page 6, filed February 26, 
 
         1991).
 
         
 
              Nevertheless, some allowance has to be made for the fact 
 
         that the L5-S1 herniation became more pronounced after claimant 
 
         no longer worked for Decker.
 
         
 
              Defendants make a point of the fact that when claimant was 
 
         released from Trinity Hospital on October 10, 1987, Dr. Wahby 
 
         recorded no pain.  Claimant's statement of no pain was probably 
 
         motivated by the fact, as recorded by Dr. Wahby, that he was 
 
         anxious to get out of the hospital and go home.  Furthermore, 
 
         claimant did not want to have a myelogram.  At the time of the 
 
         myelogram following the Giese injury, the medical notes record 
 
         that claimant was afraid to have the myelogram for fear it would 
 
         leave him paralyzed.  By October 16, 1987, Dr. Wahby recorded low 
 
         back pain again radiating into his lower left extremity (exs. 4, 
 
         p. 54; 3, p. 3).
 
         
 
              Defendants also make a point of the fact that when claimant 
 
         applied for work at Crouse Cartage, claimant was refused work 
 
         because of his back condition, initially, and claimant was 
 
         required to obtain an opinion from Dr. Wahby before he could go 
 
         to work, and Dr. Wahby found, on March 28, 1988, that claimant 
 
         reported no problems with his back and that he had not had any 
 
         pain lately.  These statements were obviously motivated by 
 
         claimant's desire to be employed at Crouse (ex. 3, p. 3).  
 
         Claimant's work ethic and desire to work to support his family is 
 
         admirable, but has also contributed to his current disability.  
 
         
 
              Probably the best evidence of the condition of claimant's 
 
         back, after the Decker injury and before anything occurred at 
 
         Crouse and Omaha Cold Storage, is best established by the exten
 
         sive examination performed by the International Academy of Chiro
 
         practic Industrial Consultants (ex. 13, pp. 3-30).  These evalua
 
         tors subtracted 49 points from 100 points and gave claimant a 
 
         biomechanical stress index score of 51 which according to their 
 
         chart constituted a "very high risk." (ex. 13, p. 11).  This is 
 
         why Crouse declined to hire him initially.  In addition to the 
 
         low score claimant obtained on his preemployment physical 
 
         examination, these evaluators also commented:
 
         
 
                 Bruised Disc 8 mos. ago while driving.  M.D. re
 
              leased him.  Left leg 1" smaller than right.  Low back 
 
              pain when raising left leg.  Can't raise left leg all 
 
              the way.  Left leg weak when muscle tested.  Blood in 
 
              urine.  Decreased reflex left leg.  Active lumbar disc 
 
              pathology.  Low back pain everyday.  Left lateral knee 
 
              pain everyday."  
 
         
 
         (exhibit 13, page 11).
 
         
 
              Thus, these evaluators, who had absolutely no stake in this 
 
         law suit, found claimant to be seriously impaired as a result of 
 
         the Decker injury on October 5, 1987, to the point where he 
 
         obtained the lowest possible classification on their evaluation 
 
         which placed him in the "very high risk" category.  For this 
 
         reason, claimant was not hired by Crouse without the consulting 
 
         opinion of Dr. Wahby.  Moreover, just two or three months later, 
 

 
         
 
         Page òòò 10        
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
         when claimant reported back pain and requested time off work, he 
 
         was fired by the owner of the truck which he operated for Crouse 
 
         Cartage.
 
         
 
              Furthermore, claimant testified that after the October 5, 
 
         1987, injury, he lost favor at Decker Truck Lines.  When asked 
 
         why he left Decker Truck Lines, claimant responded:
 
         
 
                 A.  We weren't getting along.  Problems on leaving 
 
              time.  I never had no problems leaving any other time, 
 
              but ever since the back injury I started getting the 
 
              cold shoulder from them.  Otherwise I was doing real 
 
              well with them, was in good with them talked to them 
 
              all until the back injury.  
 
         
 
                 And as soon as I got that, everybody started to kind 
 
              of turn away and, you know, wasn't getting the loads.  
 
              Just wasn't the same as it was before, you know.
 
         (transcript pages 50 & 51).
 
         
 
              Wherefore, based on the testimony of Dr. Wahby, Dr. Boulden,  
 
         The International Academy of Chiropractic Industrial Consul
 
         stants, claimant, and the medical records, it is determined that 
 
         the injury with employer Decker Truck Lines, Inc., on October 5, 
 
         1987, was the cause of claimant's additional temporary disability 
 
         for the stipulated period from July 1, 1989 to October 12, 1989, 
 
         for the back surgery on October 21, 1989, and it was also a very 
 
         substantial cause of claimant's permanent disability.  
 
         
 
                  entitlement to additional temporary disability
 
         
 
              Based on the foregoing discussion it is determined that 
 
         claimant is entitled to an additional 14.714 weeks of healing 
 
         period benefits for the period from July 1, 1989 to October 12, 
 
         1989, the period stipulated to by the parties and which is sup
 
         ported by the evidence.  Defendants are entitled to a credit for 
 
         these healing period benefits for the reason they were ordered 
 
         paid by Deputy Nelson in her decision. 
 
         
 
                       entitlement to permanent disability
 
         
 
              Although claimant's overall industrial disability is more, 
 
         it is determined the claimant is entitled to 150 weeks of perma
 
         nent partial disability benefits based upon a 30 percent indus
 
         trial disability to the body as a whole caused by the injury at 
 
         Decker Truck Line on October 5, 1987.  This determination takes 
 
         into consideration the back strain which occurred while working 
 
         for Giese Construction as well as the episode of back pain while 
 
         claimant was working for Crouse and the episode of back pain that 
 
         claimant experienced while working for Omaha Cold Storage.  
 
         Bearce v. FMC Corporation, 465 N.W.2d 531 (Ia. App. 1991).
 
         
 
              With respect to impairment, it is determined that claimant 
 
         had at least a 5 percent impairment to the body as a whole based 
 
         upon the nonoperated intervertebral herniated disc according to 
 
         Dr. Boulden's testimony, irrespective of any other injuries or 
 
         episodes of back pain which claimant might have encountered at 
 
         any other time or with any other employer (ex. 16, pp. 11 & 12).  
 
         In addition, the functional capacity evaluation by Dr. Boulden 
 
         placed claimant in a medium-heavy classification which is inter
 

 
         
 
         Page òòò 11        
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
         preted to mean that claimant can lift 50 to 75 pounds occasion
 
         ally and 40 to 50 pounds frequently (ex. 7, pp. 4-6; ex. 16, p. 
 
         6).  The worst restriction, however, is that claimant is fore
 
         closed from over-the-road truck driving which he had performed 
 
         for various companies from 1986 through 1989.  Michael v. 
 
         Harrison County, Thirty-fourth Biennial Report of the Industrial 
 
         Commissioner 218, 220 (Appeal Decision January 30, 1979); 
 
         Rohrberg v. Griffin Pipe Products Co., I Iowa Industrial 
 
         Commissioner Report 282 (1984).  This would also foreclose 
 
         claimant from his only other two prior employments of heavy 
 
         equipment operator and construction laborer.  Thus, claimant is 
 
         unable to return to any of his past employments.
 
         
 
              Claimant, born March 3, 1962, was 25 years old at the time 
 
         of the injury; 28 years old at the time of the hearing; and 29 
 
         years old at the time of this decision.  At claimant's relatively 
 
         young work career age, claimant could still develop some type of 
 
         remunerative employment, but his prospects for doing so are 
 
         extremely limited.  Claimant was examined and evaluated by the 
 
         Iowa Central Community College Assessment Center and an evalua
 
         tion report was given on October 30, 1989 (ex. 11).  
 
         
 
              Claimant testified at the hearing that he completed eighth 
 
         grade, but the community college stated that he attended school 
 
         up through the ninth grade.  Claimant has not obtained a GED.  
 
         Several vocational tests were performed.  Claimant placed below 
 
         the third grade level in the areas of reading and spelling and at 
 
         the beginning of fifth grade level in the area of arithmetic.  
 
         Thus, claimant is a poor candidate for any academic retraining.  
 
         Conrad v. Marquette School, Inc., IV Iowa Industrial 
 
         Commissioner Report 74, 89 (1984).  
 
         
 
              Claimant reported that he was able to lift 75 pounds 
 
         occasionally and 50 pounds on a continuous basis, but that he was 
 
         limited to sitting for periods of 30 minutes to an hour.  He also 
 
         expressed difficulty when standing in one place for a period of 
 
         over 14 minutes.  Because of his low grade equivalency scores, it 
 
         was recommended that he was better suited for on-the-job training 
 
         rather than training in an academic setting (ex. 11, pp. 1-5).  
 
         
 
              There was no evidence that claimant has sought vocational 
 
         rehabilitation training through the Iowa State Vocational 
 
         Rehabilitation Service nor was there any evidence that any 
 
         private, independent vocational rehabilitation assistance had 
 
         been offered to claimant by employer. 
 
         
 
              Even though Dr. Boulden restricted claimant from 
 
         over-the-road truck driving, he made one more trip with employer 
 
         and found that he was unable to do it after he was released by 
 
         Dr. Boulden in October 1989 (tr. p. 58).  He applied for other 
 
         truck driving jobs, but was turned down because of his back 
 
         injuries (tr. p. 59).  
 
         
 
              Claimant then became self-employed in the junk business.  He 
 
         buys old discs, thrashers, rakes and other kinds of farm equip
 
         ment and scrap iron from farmers; cuts it up and sells it to sal
 
         vage buyers.  He employs two other persons in this business and 
 
         pays them $100 a week.  He testified that he earns approximately 
 
         $150 to $200 per week (tr. pp. 59, 61, 72 & 73).  One hundred 
 
         fifty dollars a week would yield annual earnings of $7800 per 
 

 
         
 
         Page òòò 12        
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
         year and earnings of $200 per week would yield earnings of 
 
         $10,400 per year.  Claimant further testified that he was earning 
 
         approximately $17,000 to $20,000 per year for employer.  Based on 
 
         his stipulated rate of compensation, this is probably correct.  
 
         
 
              Thus, comparing his lower range of earnings, $7800, with 
 
         $17,000 per year, would produce a 54 percent actual loss of 
 
         income.  Comparing his higher range of earnings, $10,400, with 
 
         $20,000, would produce a 48 percent loss of actual income.  Thus, 
 
         claimant has sustained an approximate 50 percent loss of income 
 
         caused by the fact that claimant is foreclosed from over-the-road 
 
         truck driving.
 
         
 
              Even though Dr. Boulden performed a double diskectomy on 
 
         L4-L5 and L5-S1, it is the opinion of this deputy, applying 
 
         agency expertise, that claimant would have received the same 
 
         restrictions as to lifting as well as being foreclosed from 
 
         over-the-road trucking, even if the surgery had been only to the 
 
         L4-L5 level alone.  Moreover, the L5-S1 bulge first manifested 
 
         itself on the CT scan at the Morris, Illinois, hospital after the 
 
         Decker injury on October 5, 1987.  Thus, even when a portion of 
 
         the impairment is prorated between this injury and the subsequent 
 
         episodes of back pain at Crouse and Omaha Cold Storage, neverthe
 
         less, this injury constitutes a substantial portion of claimant's 
 
         industrial disability, loss of earnings capacity and loss of 
 
         actual earnings.  
 
         
 
              Aside from the testimony of Dr. Wahby and Dr. Boulden, 
 
         claimant's earning capacity as an over-the-road truck driver was 
 
         greatly impaired after the Decker injury on October 5, 1987, and 
 
         before he went to work for Crouse and later Omaha Cold Storage 
 
         based upon the 25-page questionnaire and evaluation of the Inter
 
         national Academy of Chiropractic Industrial Consultants, who 
 
         subtracted 49 points from claimant's 100 percent possible ability 
 
         to perform over-the-road trucking (1) because of his disability 
 
         up to three weeks which had sciatic nerve involvement, 
 
         (2) because he had one or more decreased or degenerated interver
 
         tebral discs, and (3) because he had one or more measurable 
 
         spinal subluxations (ex. 13, pp. 5-7).  More importantly, this 
 
         group found that claimant's left leg was one inch smaller than 
 
         his right leg; he had low back pain when raising his leg; he 
 
         could not raise his leg all of the way up; his left leg was weak 
 
         when muscle tested; he had decreased muscle strength in his leg; 
 
         active lumbar disc pathology; and low back pain everyday.  This 
 
         group appears to trace this to the injury which occurred eight 
 
         months ago, prior to March 29, 1988; which would be the Decker 
 
         injury on October 5, 1987.  Thus, irrespective of anything that 
 
         occurred while working for Giese, Crouse or Omaha Cold Storage, 
 
         claimant had a substantial amount of injury attributable to 
 
         Decker Truck Lines because the Giese injury was only a strain and 
 
         claimant had not yet gone to work for Crouse of Omaha Cold 
 
         Storage.
 
         
 
              Kelly Blanchard, claimant's wife, testified that since the 
 
         surgery, he has difficulty bending, lifting and performing every
 
         day work.  When he gets home at night he usually goes to bed.  
 
         Occasionally he has to take time off to rest his back for two or 
 
         three days.  He can no longer mow the yard, lift the baby or fix 
 
         the car.
 
         
 

 
         
 
         Page òòò 13        
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
              Wherefore, based upon at least a 5 percent permanent impair
 
         ment rating; the fact that claimant's work capacity is reduced to 
 
         medium-heavy, which means lifting 50 to 75 pounds occasionally 
 
         and 40 to 50 pounds frequently; the fact that claimant is fore
 
         closed from over-the-road truck driving, heavy equipment operat
 
         ing or construction laborer, which are all of his past employ
 
         ments; the fact that claimant is a very poor candidate for any 
 
         future education and training on an academic level; and the fact 
 
         that claimant has sustained an approximate 50 percent loss of 
 
         actual earnings; and taking into consideration the Giese back 
 
         strain for which Dr. Boulden said claimant had no impairment, and 
 
         after which he continued to work for several years without 
 
         restrictions; and taking into consideration the episodes of back 
 
         pain claimant encountered while working for Crouse and Omaha Cold 
 
         Storage; and based upon all of the evidence presented and all of 
 
         the factors used to determine industrial disability; Christensen 
 
         v. Hagen, Inc., vol. I, no. 3, State of Iowa Industrial Commis
 
         sioner Decisions 529 (Appeal Decision March 26, 1985), Peterson 
 
         v. Truck Haven Cafe, Inc., vol. 1, no. 3 State of Iowa Industrial 
 
         Commissioner Decisions 654, 658 (Appeal Decision February 28, 
 
         1985); and based upon agency expertise, [Iowa Administrative Pro
 
         cedure Act 17A.14(5)]; it is determined that claimant has sus
 
         tained a 30 percent industrial disability to the body as a whole 
 
         and that claimant is entitled to 150 weeks of workers' compensa
 
         tion permanent partial disability benefits.
 
         
 
                                 medical benefits
 
         
 
              It is determined that claimant is entitled to $10,808.22 in 
 
         medical benefits as claimed.  
 
         
 
              The parties stipulated that the provider of medical services 
 
         would testify that the fees charged were reasonable and that they 
 
         were incurred for reasonable and necessary treatment for the 
 
         alleged work injury.  It is now determined that the injury of 
 
         October 5, 1987, was a substantial cause of these medical 
 
         expenses.  Dr. Boulden testified that the initial herniation of 
 
         the L4-L5 disc coupled with continued over-the-road driving 
 
         caused claimant's condition to worsen to the point where the 
 
         surgery was required.  But for, the initial herniation of the 
 
         L4-L5 disc on October 5, 1987, over-the-road truck driving in and 
 
         of itself should not have resulted in the surgery which was 
 
         performed by Dr. Boulden.  
 
         
 
              Claimant testified as to the amounts and creditors to whom 
 
         these bills were owed (tr. pp. 64-68).  In addition, these medi
 
         cal bills are listed and itemized in the decision of Deputy 
 
         Nelson on page seven of her decision and official notice has been 
 
         taken of that decision.  
 
         
 
              The medical expenses are as follows:
 
         
 
              Central Iowa Orthopaedics          $ 5,125.00
 
         
 
              Central Iowa Pathologists              170.00
 
         
 
              DM Anesthesiologists                   528.00
 
         
 
              Manual Therapy Center                   87.50
 
         
 

 
         
 
         Page òòò 14        
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
              Lutheran Hospital                    4,897.72
 
         
 
                                       TOTAL     $10,808.22
 
         
 
              Defendants are entitled to a credit for these medical 
 
         expenses which Deputy Nelson ordered to be paid by Omaha Cold 
 
         Storage in her decision.
 
         
 
                                conclusions of law
 
         
 
              Wherefore, based upon the foregoing and following principles 
 
         of law, these conclusions of law are made:
 
         
 
              That the injury of October 5, 1987, was the cause of addi
 
         tional temporary disability for the stipulated period from July 
 
         1, 1989 to October 12, 1989.  Bodish v. Fischer, Inc., 257 Iowa 
 
         516, 133 N.W.2d 867 (1965); Lindahl v. L.O. Boggs Co., 236 Iowa 
 
         296 18 N.W.2d 607 (1945).
 
         
 
              That claimant is entitled to additional temporary disability 
 
         benefits for 14.714 weeks of healing period benefits for this 
 
         period of time.  Iowa Code section 85.34(1).
 
         
 
              That the injury of October 5, 1987, was the cause of perma
 
         nent disability.  Bodish, 257 Iowa 516, 133 N.W.2d 867; Lindahl, 
 
         236 Iowa 296 18 N.W.2d 607.
 
         
 
              That claimant has sustained a 30 percent industrial disabil
 
         ity to the body as a whole and is entitled to 150 weeks of perma
 
         nent partial disability benefits.  Iowa Code section 85.34(2)(u); 
 
         Diederich v. Tri-City R. Co., 219 Iowa 587, 593, 258 N.W. 899 
 
         (1935); Olson v. Goodyear Service Stores, 255 Iowa 1112, 125 
 
         N.W.2d 251 (1963); Bearce, 465 N.W.2d 531.
 
         
 
              That claimant is entitled to $10,808.22 in medical expenses. 
 
         Iowa Code section 85.27.
 
         
 
              That defendants are entitled to a credit for the additional 
 

 
         
 
         Page òòò 15        
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
         temporary total disability benefits and the medical expenses 
 
         awarded here if they have already been paid by Omaha Cold Storage 
 
         as ordered by Deputy Nelson.
 
         
 
                                      order
 
         
 
              THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED:
 
         
 
              That defendants pay to claimant fourteen point seven one 
 
         four (14.714) weeks of additional healing period benefits for the 
 
         period from July 1, 1989 to October 12, 1989, a period stipulated 
 
         to by the parties and supported by the evidence, at the 
 
         stipulated rate of three hundred thirty-five and 73/100 
 
         dollars($335.73) per week in the total amount of four thousand 
 
         nine hundred thirty-nine and 93/100 dollars ($4,939.93) 
 
         commencing on July 1, 1989.
 
         
 
              That defendants pay to claimant one hundred fifty (150) 
 
         weeks of permanent partial disability benefits based upon a 
 
         thirty (30) percent industrial disability to the body as a whole 
 
         at the stipulated rate of three hundred thirty-five and 73/100 
 
         dollars($335.73) per week in the total amount of fifty thousand 
 
         three hundred fifty-nine and 50/100 ($50,359.50) commencing at 
 
         the end of healing period on October 23, 1987, when Dr. Wahby 
 
         released claimant to return to work after the injury of October 
 
         5, 1987 (ex. 3, page 3).  Teel v. McCord, 394 N.W.2d 405 (Iowa 
 
         1986); and interrupted by the additional healing period awarded 
 
         above.
 
         
 
              That defendants are entitled to a credit for the additional 
 
         healing period benefits if they have previously been paid by 
 
         Omaha Cold Storage pursuant to the decision of Deputy Nelson.
 
         
 
              That all accrued benefits are to be paid in a lump sum.
 
         
 
              That interest will accrue pursuant to Iowa Code section 
 
         85.30. 
 
         
 
              That defendants pay to claimant or the provider of medical 
 
         services, ten thousand eight hundred eight and 22/100 dollars 
 
         ($10,808.22) in medical expenses.
 
         
 
              That defendants are entitled to a credit for any medical 
 
         expenses paid by Omaha Cold Storage pursuant to the decision of 
 
         Deputy Nelson.
 
         
 
              That the costs of this action are charged to defendants, 
 
         including the cost of the attendance of the court reporter at 
 
         hearing and the transcript of the hearing.  Rule 343 IAC 4.33; 
 
         Iowa Code section 86.19(1).
 
         
 
              That defendants file claim activity reports as requested by 
 
         this agency pursuant to rule 343 IAC 3.1.
 
         
 
              
 
         
 
              
 
         
 
              Signed and filed this ____ day of August, 1991.
 
         
 

 
         
 
         Page òòò 16        
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
         
 
                                       ______________________________
 
                                       WALTER R. McMANUS, JR.
 
                                       DEPUTY INDUSTRIAL COMMISSIONER    
 
         
 
         Copies to:
 
         
 
         Mr. Monte Fisher
 
         Attorney at Law
 
         200 Snell Bldg.
 
         Fort Dodge, Iowa  50501
 
         
 
         Mr. Tito Trevino
 
         Attorney at Law
 
         801 Carver Bldg.
 
         PO Box 1680
 
         Fort Dodge, Iowa  50501
 
         
 
         Mr. James E. Fitzgerald
 
         Attorney at Law
 
         1223 S 20th St.
 
         Fort Dodge, Iowa  50501
 
         
 
 
            
 
            Page   1
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
                                          51108.50 51402.40 51802 51803 
 
                                          52501 52700
 
                                          Filed August 23, 1991
 
                                          Walter R. McManus, Jr.
 
            
 
                           before the iowa industrial 
 
                                   commissioner
 
            ____________________________________________________________
 
                                          :
 
            JOHN F. BLANCHARD,            :
 
                                          :
 
                 Claimant,                :
 
                                          :
 
            vs.                           :
 
                                          :      File No.  867353
 
            DECKER TRUCK LINES,           :
 
                                          :  A R B I T R A T I O N
 
                 Employer,                :
 
                                          :      D E C I S I O N
 
            and                           :
 
                                          :
 
            LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE,     :
 
                                          :
 
                 Insurance Carrier,       :
 
                 Defendants.              :
 
            ___________________________________________________________
 
            
 
            51108.50 51402.40 51802 51803 
 
            It was determined that the injury was the cause of 
 
            additional temporary disability and also permanent 
 
            disability.
 
            Claimant awarded temporary disability (healing period) for 
 
            the period stipulated to by the parties which was also 
 
            supported by the evidence.
 
            Claimant awarded 150 weeks of permanent partial disability 
 
            benefits based on a 30 percent industrial disability to the 
 
            body as a whole after consideration for a prior injury and 
 
            two subsequent episodes of low back pain were taken into 
 
            consideration.
 
            
 
            52501 52700
 
            Claimant awarded medical expenses as claimed.
 
            
 
 
            
 
            Page   1
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
                     before the iowa industrial commissioner
 
            ____________________________________________________________
 
                                          :
 
            ISAAC WYANT,                  :
 
                                          :
 
                 Claimant,                :
 
                                          :
 
            vs.                           :         File Nos. 815193
 
                                          :                   867537
 
            CENTURY MOTOR FREIGHT,        :
 
                                          :      A R B I T R A T I O N
 
                 Employer,                :
 
                                          :         D E C I S I O N
 
            and                           :
 
                                          :
 
            FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP,      :
 
                                          :
 
                 Insurance Carrier,       :
 
                 Defendants.              :
 
            ____________________________________________________________
 
            
 
                                   introduction
 
            
 
                 This decision addresses two proceedings in arbitration 
 
            which have been brought by Isaac Wyant against Century Motor 
 
            Freight, his former employer, and Farmers Insurance Group, 
 
            the employer's insurance carrier.  File number 815193 deals 
 
            with a back injury which occurred on January 24, 1986.  File 
 
            number 867537 deals with a shoulder injury which occurred on 
 
            September 24, 1987.  The two proceedings were consolidated 
 
            and heard at Des Moines, Iowa on August 18, 1989.  The 
 
            record in the proceedings consists of jointly offered 
 
            exhibits 1 through 13 and defendants' exhibits A through L.  
 
            The record also contains testimony from Isaac Wyant, John 
 
            Van Arsdale, and Kent Jayne.
 
            
 
                                      issues
 
            
 
                 The only issue presented by the parties is 
 
            determination of the extent of permanent disability which 
 
            resulted from each of the injuries.  Claimant asserts that 
 
            he is permanently, totally disabled and relies upon the 
 
            odd-lot doctrine.  It was stipulated that the rate of 
 
            compensation applicable to the January 24, 1986 injury is 
 
            $457.95 per week and that for the September 24, 1987 injury 
 
            the correct rate of compensation is $485.00 per week.  It 
 
            was stipulated that healing period compensation had been 
 
            paid whenever due in both cases and that any permanent 
 
            partial disability compensation which is awarded for the 
 
            1986 injury is payable commencing July 7, 1986.  It was 
 
            stipulated that any permanent disability compensation 
 
            payable for the 1987 injury should commence on May 6, 1988.  
 
            It was further stipulated that 51 5/7 weeks of permanent 
 
            partial disability compensation has been paid for the 1986 
 

 
            
 
            Page   2
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            injury and that 60 weeks of permanent partial disability 
 
            compensation has been paid for the 1987 injury.  No claim 
 
            was made for additional medical expenses.
 
            
 
                               summary of evidence
 
            
 
                 All the evidence referred to in the Introduction, as 
 
            well as the demeanor of those who testified at hearing, was 
 
            considered when deciding this case.  The lack of a reference 
 
            to any particular part of the record does not indicate that 
 
            it was overlooked.
 
            
 
                 The evidentiary facts in this case are not seriously 
 
            disputed by the parties except with regard to some of the 
 
            events which occurred in 1988 dealing with the offer made by 
 
            the employer to provide work for claimant and also with 
 
            regard to the general availability of work which claimant is 
 
            capable of performing and obtaining.  The pertinent medical 
 
            evidence is provided by claimant's treating physicians, 
 
            William R. Boulden, M.D., and Scott B. Neff, D.O., without 
 
            contradiction from any other physician.
 
            
 
                 Isaac Wyant is a 57-year-old married man who has five 
 
            grown children.  Wyant stated that his formal education 
 
            ended with the eighth grade, although the record at one 
 
            point reflects he had represented that he had completed the 
 
            tenth grade.  Wyant denied having any further formal 
 
            education or having served in the military.
 
            
 
                 Wyant's work history contains some remote experience 
 
            working on a farm, coal yard, lumberyard and department 
 
            store.  Approximately 35 years ago, he began driving a truck 
 
            for Rock Island Motor Transit Company where he remained 
 
            employed for 25 years until the company closed.  He worked 
 
            briefly for American Freight Systems, Inc., and then moved 
 
            to Century Motor Freight approximately 10 years ago.  Wyant 
 
            stated that he worked the dock, performed delivery and 
 
            pickup of freight, and also performed over-the-road driving.
 
            
 
                 Wyant's health history as described by him includes 
 
            normal childhood diseases, a left shoulder problem which 
 
            resolved with treatment several years ago, a left thumb 
 
            injury that occurred in 1950, an appendectomy in the early 
 
            1960's and pneumonia in 1984 (exhibit 1, page 81).  Claimant 
 
            specifically denied having any problem with his right 
 
            shoulder or back prior to January of 1986.
 
            
 
                 On January 24, 1986, Isaac Wyant was making a delivery 
 
            in Rock Island, Illinois when the track of an overhead type 
 
            door failed and the door fell on him.  Initially, he 
 
            received conservative medical treatment from Scott Q. 
 
            Carver, M.D., and William R. Boulden, M.D.  A CT scan was 
 
            interpreted as being normal.  The diagnosis of a lumbosacral 
 
            strain was made (exhibit 1, page 13).  Claimant was released 
 
            to return to work on March 24, 1986 (exhibit 1, page 12).
 
            
 
                 Claimant continued to complain of his back after he 
 
            resumed employment.  He was taken off work a second time by 
 

 
            
 
            Page   3
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            Dr. Carver on August 8, 1986 (exhibit 1, pages 73 and 80).  
 
            On August 13, 1986, Dr. Carver prescribed that the seat in 
 
            the truck which claimant drove be replaced (exhibit 1, pages 
 
            73 and 79).  By August 25, 1986, claimant had improved and 
 
            was released to return to work (exhibit 1, pages 22, 73 and 
 
            79).
 
            
 
                 On September 24, 1987, Wyant injured his right shoulder 
 
            while hooking a double-bottom trailer.  He was treated with 
 
            medication, but was not immediately taken off work.  When 
 
            claimant's complaints did not resolve he was referred to 
 
            Scott B. Neff, D.O., who initially diagnosed subacromial 
 
            impingement of the right shoulder (exhibit 1, page 30).  
 
            After diagnostic testing had been completed, a further 
 
            diagnosis of a complete tear of the right rotator cuff was 
 
            made and surgery was recommended (exhibit 1, pages 29, 101 
 
            and 102).  On January 6, 1988, impingement syndrome release 
 
            with rotator cuff repair surgery was performed by Dr. Neff 
 
            (exhibit 1, pages 29 and 91-100).  Claimant's shoulder was 
 
            noted to be extensively deteriorated.
 
            
 
                 While recuperating from shoulder surgery, claimant was 
 
            again seen by Dr. Boulden regarding his back.  Dr. Boulden 
 
            diagnosed claimant as having degenerative disc disease of 
 
            the lumbar spine.  Conservative treatment was provided.  Dr. 
 
            Boulden stated that claimant could not return to heavy 
 
            physical work due to the problems with his back (exhibit 1, 
 
            page 28).  On April 6, 1988, Dr. Neff indicated that 
 
            claimant would have permanent impairment of his shoulder as 
 
            well as in his back.  He confirmed that claimant would not 
 
            be able to return to his former occupation of a truck driver 
 
            (exhibit 1, pages 24 and 26).  On April 22, 1986, Dr. 
 
            Boulden reported that claimant's problems are related to the 
 
            original injury (exhibit 1, page 26).
 
            
 
                 On April 28, 1988, Dr. Boulden reported that claimant 
 
            would reach maximum improvement regarding his back condition 
 
            on May 9, 1988.  He indicated that claimant should observe 
 
            permanent restrictions to avoid bending, twisting, and 
 
            prolonged sitting of more than 30 minutes.  He assigned a 10 
 
            percent permanent impairment rating (exhibit 1, page 25).  
 
            On June 3, 1988, Dr. Neff reported that maximum healing from 
 
            the shoulder surgery had occurred on May 6, 1988 (exhibit 1, 
 
            page 25; exhibits H and L).
 
            
 
                 Claimant has not returned to work since being taken off 
 
            for the shoulder injury.  In early May of 1988, claimant met 
 
            with Century Motor Freight representative John Van Arsdale 
 
            and possibly with Andy Selenia.  According to claimant, he 
 
            was told at that meeting that the employer's policy was to 
 
            not take anyone back to work with restrictions.  Claimant 
 
            stated that after that meeting, vocational consultant Kent 
 
            Jayne became involved and in early July, Jayne advised 
 
            claimant that Century would not reemploy him with 
 
            restrictions.  Claimant stated that on July 12, 1988 he sent 
 
            a letter to John Van Arsdale asking for a retirement 
 
            application.  Claimant stated that approximately two months 
 
            later he was informed by his employer that a run had been 
 

 
            
 
            Page   4
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            arranged for him.  Claimant stated that he had held that 
 
            same run in the past, but that it proved to be unreliable 
 
            and that in time so much of the freight was diverted to 
 
            other runs that he was working only one day per week.  He 
 
            then used his seniority to bump out to a different run.  
 
            Claimant stated that he asked his employer if he would be 
 
            able to move into a different run if the St. Paul runs 
 
            dwindled and that he was told he could not move.  Claimant 
 
            stated that he had some concern that certain parts of the 
 
            work such as blocking, tie downs and pulling chain binders 
 
            might exceed the restrictions which his doctor had 
 
            recommended.  The job description for the job offered 
 
            indicated that it would be necessary for claimant to block 
 
            and brace freight, hook and drop trailers, and that he would 
 
            have to drive for up to two hours between breaks (exhibits B 
 
            and 5).  Claimant acknowledged that when he was deposed, he 
 
            had stated that the job did meet Dr. Boulden's restrictions.  
 
            Claimant also stated at hearing that he felt the company was 
 
            not sincere in its job offer.
 
            
 
                 Claimant elected to take an early retirement with a 
 
            pension of $1,000 per month.  He stated that if he had 
 
            remained employed and worked until age 65, as he had hoped 
 
            to do, his pension would be $2,000 per month.  John Van 
 
            Arsdale confirmed that if claimant had retired at age 65, 
 
            the pension would be $2,000 per month.  Van Arsdale stated 
 
            that retirement in the range of age 60 or 62 is more common 
 
            than at age 65, but that he had no reason to doubt 
 
            claimant's testimony of wanting to wait until age 65 to 
 
            retire. 
 
            
 
                 John Van Arsdale stated that when he met with claimant 
 
            in May of 1988 he told claimant that the medical information 
 
            did not look good for permitting claimant to return to work 
 
            as a driver or dock worker and that he suggested claimant 
 
            look for other employment.  Van Arsdale testified that he 
 
            then started the process to obtain vocational rehabilitation 
 
            services for claimant and that Kent Jayne became involved as 
 
            a result.  Van Arsdale stated that after working with Jayne 
 
            and union representatives, a job proposal was developed in 
 
            July, but that due to scheduling conflicts, a meeting with 
 
            claimant could not be arranged until September 8, 1988.  Van 
 
            Arsdale stated that the job which is described in exhibit B 
 
            was offered and that questions were asked at the meeting.  
 
            Van Arsdale stated that claimant was told that the company 
 
            would accommodate him, even to the extent of hiring someone 
 
            locally to assist if claimant broke down while on the road.  
 
            Van Arsdale stated that the job was available and had been 
 
            available and that it had been run on a daily basis.  Van 
 
            Arsdale stated that on the day following the meeting, he 
 
            received notice that claimant had declined the job and had 
 
            elected to retire.
 
            
 
                 Van Arsdale stated that Andy Selenia, a company 
 
            representative at the Des Moines terminal for Century Motor 
 

 
            
 
            Page   5
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            Freight, had been of the understanding that employees with 
 
            restrictions would not be allowed to return to work, but 
 
            that he then made Selenia aware that his understanding had 
 
            been incorrect.
 
            
 
                 Kent Jayne testified that when he became involved in 
 
            this case, his initial goal was to clarify claimant's 
 
            medical status and possibly arrange a return to work with 
 
            Century Motor Freight.  Jayne related that the optimum 
 
            choice for seeking return to work of an injured employee is 
 
            with the employer, but that when he initially contacted Andy 
 
            Selenia, the manager of the Des Moines terminal, Selenia 
 
            told him that company policy would not allow a return to 
 
            work with restrictions.  Jayne stated that he was 
 
            subsequently advised by Van Arsdale that work with 
 
            restrictions was a possibility.  Jayne stated that he 
 
            obtained information from Drs. Neff and Boulden which would 
 
            permit claimant to return to truck driving with 
 
            restrictions.  Jayne confirmed Van Arsdale's testimony 
 
            regarding the offer of the Des Moines to St. Paul run and of 
 
            the company's assurance that claimant would not be required 
 
            to violate his medical restrictions.
 
            
 
                 Jayne testified that on the day following the meeting, 
 
            he was informed by claimant's attorney that the offer was 
 
            declined and that the employer deserved a "pat on the back" 
 
            for its efforts.  Jayne stated that he was then informed 
 
            that claimant wanted to continue with other job placement 
 
            efforts.
 
            
 
                 Jayne stated that claimant's restrictions would place 
 
            him in the light work status.  Jayne stated that, within the 
 
            Des Moines area, there were 900-1,000 jobs per year which 
 
            would be open and available to claimant.  Jayne stated that 
 
            he had checked with employers and found several positions 
 
            open, including positions in security, courier service and 
 
            limo driver.  He stated that the pay scale would range from 
 
            $3.87 per hour to $10.00 per hour.  Jayne stated that he had 
 
            not given those job leads to claimant prior to the time of 
 
            hearing.
 
            
 
                 Jayne stated that Nancy Hendricks, one of his 
 
            subordinates, had sent claimant a computer printout of 
 
            targeted occupational areas based upon a transferrable 
 
            skills analysis.  A review of the list, which is found at 
 
            exhibit 2, pages 154-156, shows it to contain a large number 
 
            of positions.  No evidence was introduced regarding whether 
 
            or not any of the jobs such as "stand-in, balcony worker, 
 
            scoreboard operator, raw juice weigher, flash adjuster, hat 
 
            blocker, powder truck driver, dinkey operator, yeast 
 
            distiller, coke crusher operator" or any of the others exist 
 
            in appreciable numbers in the Des Moines area.
 
            
 
                 Following his decision to decline the job which had 
 
            been offered by Century Motor Freight, claimant did seek 
 
            other jobs (exhibit 6).
 
            
 
                 Claimant continued to have problems with his back which 
 

 
            
 
            Page   6
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            led to Dr. Boulden performing surgery on May 10, 1989.  Dr. 
 
            Boulden described the surgery as a decompression laminectomy 
 
            of L5-S1 for decompression of the nerves of L5.  Dr. Boulden 
 
            reported that the surgery had resulted in some reduction of 
 
            claimant's pain and that the prognosis was good.  He stated 
 
            that he expected claimant to have a 10 percent impairment 
 
            when the recuperative process was completed.  Dr. Boulden 
 
            related that claimant could possibly drive a truck if he 
 
            would be able to get out frequently (exhibit 1, page 3; 
 
            exhibit I).  Claimant agreed that the surgery had taken away 
 
            his pain, but that he still experienced numbness in his leg.  
 
            At the time of hearing, claimant had not yet been released 
 
            by Dr. Boulden to resume employment.
 
            
 
                 On July 14, 1989, Dr. Boulden reported that claimant's 
 
            disability had increased from 10 perdent to 15 percent as a 
 
            result of the surgery.  He recommended restrictions against 
 
            bending, twisting or lifting and also against sitting for 
 
            more than 45 minutes (exhibit 1, page 14).  On April 7, 
 
            1988, Dr. Neff provided a rating for claimant's shoulder of 
 
            12 percent of the body as a whole (exhibit 1, pages 44 and 
 
            45).
 
            
 
                
 
            
 
            
 
            Page   7
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            applicable law and analysis
 
            
 
                 Since claimant has an impairment to the body as a 
 
            whole, an industrial disability has been sustained.  
 
            Industrial disability was defined in Diederich v. Tri-City 
 
            Railway Co., 219 Iowa 587, 593, 258 N.W.2d 899, 902 (1935) 
 
            as follows: "It is therefore plain that the legislature 
 
            intended the term `disability' to mean `industrial 
 
            disability' or loss of earning capacity and not a mere 
 
            `functional disability' to be computed in the terms of 
 
            percentages of the total physical and mental ability of a 
 
            normal man."
 
            
 
                 Functional impairment is an element to be considered in 
 
            determining industrial disability which is the reduction of 
 
            earning capacity, but consideration must also be given to 
 
            the injured employee's age, education, qualifications, 
 
            experience and inability to engage in employment for which 
 
            he is fitted.  Olson v. Goodyear Service Stores, 255 Iowa 
 
            1112, 1121, 125 N.W.2d 251, 257 (1963).
 
            
 
                 Industrial disability or loss of earning capacity is a 
 
            concept that is quite similar to impairment of earning 
 
            capacity, an element of damage in a tort case.  Impairment 
 
            of physical capacity creates an inference of lessened 
 
            earning capacity.  The basis element to be determined, 
 
            however, is the reduction in value of the general earning 
 
            capacity of the person, rather than the loss of wages or 
 
            earnings in a specific occupation.  Post-injury earnings 
 
            create a presumption of earning capacity.  The earnings are 
 
            not synonymous with earning capacity and the presumption may 
 
            be rebutted by evidence showing the earnings to be an 
 
            unreliable indicator.  Carradus v. Lange, 203 N.W.2d 565 
 
            (Iowa 1973); Holmquist v. Volkswagon of America, Inc., 261 
 
            N.W.2d 516 (Iowa App. 1977) A.L.R.3d 143; Michael v. 
 
            Harrison County, 34th Biennial Report, 218 (1979); 2 Larson 
 
            Workmen's Compensation Law, sections 57.21 and 57.31.
 
            
 
                 According to claimant's testimony, his gross wages for 
 
            1985, 1986 and 1987 have been approximately $42,000, $32,000 
 
            and $39,000, respectively.  Of those totals, he related that 
 
            taxes had consumed approximately $13,000, $10,000 and 
 
            $14,000, respectively.  The evidence showed that, when 
 
            claimant was receiving his pension, and workers' 
 
            compensation permanent partial disability benefits, there 
 
            were times when he actually had more spendable income than 
 
            what had been available to him while he was actually 
 
            working.  It appears as though claimant might have been 
 
            capable of performing the St. Paul run which was offered to 
 
            him, although there is also ample evidence in the record 
 
            from which claimant could have reasonably believed that the 
 
            offer was not made in good faith.  At the time the offer was 
 
            made, Dr. Boulden's restriction of 30 minutes of sitting 
 
            while driving was apparently in effect and it is difficult 
 
            for the undersigned to reconcile that restriction with 
 
            over-the-road truck driving.  In any event, if claimant had 
 

 
            
 
            Page   8
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            accepted the offered job, if the job had provided regular 
 
            work, and if claimant would have been capable of performing 
 
            that work on a long-term, sustained basis, the reduction in 
 
            earnings which claimant has experienced would have been 
 
            avoided.  The fact that a major reduction in earnings had 
 
            been avoided would not, however, relieve the employer from 
 
            all liability for industrial disability.  On the other hand, 
 
            there is no certainty in the record of this case with regard 
 
            to claimant's ability to perform that work on a long-term, 
 
            sustained basis.  If anything, the evidence from Drs. Neff 
 
            and Boulden does not provide any basis for particular 
 
            optimism.  The fact that claimant has sustained a 
 
            substantial degree of industrial disability is clearly 
 
            demonstrated by his lack of success in obtaining work of any 
 
            type with any other employer.  The fact that Century Motor 
 
            Freight is the only employer who has offered him a job is 
 
            strong evidence of a very substantial degree of disability.
 
            
 
                 Claimant urges application of the odd-lot doctrine.  
 
            Making a bona fide search for work and finding none is one 
 
            method of making a prima facie showing of permanent total 
 
            disability.  That showing has been made in this case.  The 
 
            burden of showing availability of suitable employment has 
 
            therefore shifted to the defendants.  The evidence of 
 
            available suitable employment as provided by Kent Jayne, 
 
            when coupled with the offer of employment from Century Motor 
 
            Freight, is sufficient to rebut the prima facie showing of 
 
            total disability.  It is not sufficient, however, to limit 
 
            claimant's recovery to the amount of permanent partial 
 
            disability which has been voluntarily paid by the 
 
            defendants.  The computer printout of potential jobs is 
 
            found to not be of any material value since there is no 
 
            showing with regard to how many, if any, of those jobs exist 
 
            in the Des Moines, Iowa area or of how frequently openings 
 
            in those jobs become available.  The jobs of which Kent 
 
            Jayne testified provided a level of earnings which was well 
 
            below the level that claimant had enjoyed as a driver for 
 
            Century Motor Freight.  The pay scale which he described 
 
            would appear to have an average somewhere in the range of 
 
            $6.00 per hour, an amount which is only approximately 
 
            one-third of what would be claimant's hourly rate of 
 
            earnings if his total 1987 earnings were based upon a 
 
            40-hour work week.  On that same basis, even the higher 
 
            range of potential hourly earnings would still be only half 
 
            of claimant's 1987 hourly earning equivalent.
 
            
 
                 Truck driving is not light work.  The bouncing and 
 
            extended sitting can be quite troublesome for someone with a 
 
            back condition.  Claimant had worked as a truck driver for 
 
            35 years and was 57 years of age at the time of hearing.  It 
 
            was certainly not unreasonable for him to elect to retire 
 
            rather than risk further injury.  The fact that he chose to 
 
            retire does not significantly detract from his credibility 
 
            or motivation.  There was ample reason for him to do so.
 

 
            
 
            Page   9
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
                 When all the foregoing considerations are taken into 
 
            account, it appears, in the final analysis, that there was 
 
            some chance that claimant could have maintained his prior 
 
            level of earnings if he had accepted the Century Motor 
 
            Freight job, but that chance is not sufficiently strong to 
 
            be considered as being probable rather than merely possible.  
 
            The greater likelihood is that he would not have been able 
 
            to physically perform all the duties of the employment, that 
 
            the employer would have become disillusioned with providing 
 
            additional assistance to him, or that he would have 
 
            sustained further injury.  It appears as though Wyant 
 
            remains capable of performing light work which would pay in 
 
            the range of $5.00-$6.00 per hour and that such work exists 
 
            in the Des Moines, Iowa area.  It is therefore determined 
 
            that Isaac Wyant has a 60 percent permanent partial 
 
            disability under the provisions of Iowa Code section 
 
            85.34(2)(u).
 
            
 
                 The shoulder injury was quite severe.  The most recent 
 
            impairment rating from Dr. Neff rates it at 12 percent 
 
            impairment of the body as a whole (exhibit 1, page 45).  The 
 
            back injury is responsible for a 15 percent impairment of 
 
            the body as a whole according to Dr. Boulden (exhibit 1, 
 
            page 14).  It appears that the back condition is the one 
 
            which provides the primary barrier to claimant resuming work 
 
            as a truck driver.  Were his only impairment the shoulder 
 
            injury, it is quite likely that he could have performed the 
 
            job which was offered in 1988 and could possibly have 
 
            resumed normal duties (exhibit 1, pages 42-48).  It is 
 
            determined that one-third of the industrial disability is 
 
            attributable to the shoulder injury and the remaining 
 
            two-thirds is attributable to the back injury.  Defendants 
 
            are, of course, entitled to credit for the 111 5/7 weeks 
 
            which was paid prior to hearing.
 
            
 
                                 findings of fact
 
            
 
                 1.  Isaac Wyant has experienced a 60 percent loss of 
 
            his earning capacity as a result of the injuries that he 
 
            sustained on January 24, 1986 and September 24, 1987.
 
            
 
                 2.  Of that total, one-third is attributable to the 
 
            shoulder injury of September 24, 1987.  The remaining 
 
            two-thirds is attributable to the back injury.
 
            
 
                                conclusions of law
 
            
 
                 1.  This agency has jurisdiction of the subject matter 
 
            of this proceeding and its parties.
 
            
 
                 2.  Isaac Wyant is entitled to recover 300 weeks of 
 
            permanent partial disability compensation under the 
 
            provisions of Iowa Code section 85.34(2)(u).
 
            
 
                 3.  One hundred weeks are payable at the rate of 
 
            $485.00 per week commencing May 6, 1988.
 
            
 

 
            
 
            Page  10
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
                 4.  Two hundred weeks are payable at the rate of 
 
            $457.95 per week commencing July 7, 1986.
 
            
 
                                      order
 
            
 
                 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendants pay Isaac Wyant 
 
            one hundred (100) weeks of compensation for permanent 
 
            partial disability in file number 867537 at the stipulated 
 
            rate of four hundred eighty-five and 00/100 dollars 
 
            ($485.00) per week payable commencing May 6, 1988.
 
            
 
                 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants pay Isaac Wyant 
 
            two hundred (200) weeks of compensation for permanent 
 
            partial disability in file number 815193 at the stipulated 
 
            rate of four hundred fifty-seven and 95/100 dollars 
 
            ($457.95) per week payable commencing July 7, 1986.
 
            
 
                 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants pay all accrued 
 
            past due amounts in a lump sum together with interest 
 
            pursuant to Iowa Code section 85.30 after crediting the 
 
            prior payments of permanent partial disability compensation.
 
            
 
                 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants pay the costs of 
 
            this action pursuant to Division of Industrial Services Rule 
 
            343-4.33.
 
            
 
                 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants file claim 
 
            activity reports in each of the respective cases as 
 
            requested by this agency pursuant to Division of Industrial 
 
            Services Rule 343-3.1.
 
            
 
                 Signed and filed this ______ day of ____________, 1990.
 
            
 
                 
 
            
 
                 
 
                 
 
                                          ______________________________
 
                                          MICHAEL G. TRIER
 
                                          DEPUTY INDUSTRIAL COMMISSIONER
 
            
 
            Copies To:
 
            
 
            Mr. Channing L. Dutton
 
            Mr. Tom Drew
 
            Attorneys at Law
 
            West Towers Office Compex
 
            1200 35th Street, Suite 500
 
            W. Des Moines, Iowa  50265
 
            
 
            Mr. Roy M. Irish
 
            Attorney at Law
 
            729 Insurance Exchange Building
 
            Des Moines, Iowa  50309
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
 
            
 
            Page   1
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
            
 
                                               5-1803
 
                                               Filed March 5, 1990
 
                                               MICHAEL G. TRIER
 
            before the iowa industrial commissioner
 
            ____________________________________________________________
 
                                          :
 
            ISAAC WYANT,                  :
 
                                          :
 
                 Claimant,                :
 
                                          :
 
            vs.                           :         File Nos. 815193
 
                                          :                   867537
 
            CENTURY MOTOR FREIGHT,        :
 
                                          :      A R B I T R A T I O N
 
                 Employer,                :
 
                                          :         D E C I S I O N
 
            and                           :
 
                                          :
 
            FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP,      :
 
                                          :
 
                 Insurance Carrier,       :
 
                 Defendants.              :
 
            ____________________________________________________________
 
            
 
            5-1803
 
            Fifty-seven-year-old truck driver whose injuries caused him 
 
            to retire, rather than accept a modified job which might not 
 
            have been within his capabilities, was awarded 60 percent 
 
            permanent partial disability.  He had made an extensive work 
 
            search and the likelihood was that any potential alternate 
 
            employment would result in a two-thirds reduction in actual 
 
            earnings.  In view of claimant's physical condition, 
 
            retirement was held to be a reasonable option and not an 
 
            indicator of any lack of motivation.