1. Introduction

1.01 The Board uses this appendix to adjudicate the occupational disability claims of employees with medical conditions and job titles covered by the Tables in this appendix. The Tables are divided into “Body Parts”, with each Body Part further divided by job title. Under each job title there is a list of impairments and tests with accompanying test results which establish a finding of “D” (disabled). The use of these Tables is a three-step process. In the first step we determine whether the employee's regular railroad occupation is covered by the Tables; next we establish the existence of an impairment covered by the Tables; finally, we reach a disability determination. If we do not find an employee disabled under these Tables, the employee may still be found disabled using Independent Case Evaluation (ICE), as explained in subpart C of this part.

1.02 The Cancer Tables are treated in a different way than other body systems. Different types of cancer and their treatments have different functional impacts. In the Cancer Tables the impact of the impairment is seen as being significant or not significant. Therefore, these tables contain an “S” (significant) which is equivalent to a “D” rating. A detailed explanation of how to use those tables is in that section. The steps to use the remaining Tables are explained below:

2. Confirming the Impairment

2.01 Once we determine that the employee's regular railroad occupation is covered by the Job Titles in the Tables, we must determine the existence of an impairment covered by the Tables. This is done through the use of Confirmatory Tests. These tests can include information from medical records, surgical or operative reports, or specific diagnostic test results. Confirmatory Tests are listed in the initial section regarding each Body Part covered in the Tables. If an impairment cannot be confirmed because of inconsistent medical information, ICE may be required.

2.02 There are two types of Confirmatory Tests as follows.

2.03 “Highly Recommended” Tests—The designation of a confirmatory test as being “highly recommended” means that the test is almost always performed to confirm the existence of the impairment. For many conditions, only one “highly recommended” test finding is suggested to confirm the impairment. However, there may be times when that test is not available or is negative, but other more detailed testing confirms the impairment.

2.04 Example A: To confirm the condition of pulmonary hypertension, the Tables under Body Part C., Cardiac, designate as “highly recommended”: an electrocardiogram which indicates definite right ventricular hypertrophy. However, the impairment may also be confirmed by insertion of a Swan-Ganz catheter into the pulmonary artery and the pulmonary artery pressure measured directly.

2.05 There may be some conditions for which several “highly recommended” tests are suggested to confirm an impairment. In these circumstances, we will use all “highly recommended” tests to establish the existence of the impairment.

2.06 Example B: Under Body Part E., Lumbar Sacral Spine, three highly recommended medical findings are identified for the diagnosis of chronic back pain, not otherwise specified. These findings include:

A. A history of back pain under medical treatment for at least one year, and

B. A history of back pain unresponsive to therapy for at least one year, and

C. A history of back pain with functional limitations for at least one year.

2.07 All three of these criteria must be satisfied to confirm the existence of chronic back pain.

2.08 Sometimes the employee may have undergone detailed testing which is as reliable as one of the “highly recommended” tests listed in the Tables. In cases where an impairment has not been confirmed by one of the designated “highly recommended” tests, the impairment may still be confirmed by “recommended” tests (see below) or by evidence acceptable under section 220.27 of this part.

2.09 Recommended Tests—The designation of a confirmatory test as “recommended” means that the test need not be performed, or be positive, to confirm the impairment. However, a positive test provides significant support for confirming the impairment. If there are no “highly recommended” tests for confirming the impairment, at least one of the “recommended” tests should be positive.

2.10 There are two categories of recommended tests which are described below.

A. Imaging studies—These studies can include MRI, CAT scan, myelogram, or plain film x-rays. For conditions where several of these imaging studies are identified as “recommended” tests, at least one of the test results should be positive and meet the confirmatory test criteria. For some conditions, such as degenerative disc condition, there are several equivalent imaging methods to confirm a diagnosis.

B. Other tests—This category of tests refers to non-imaging studies.

2.11 If there are no “highly recommended” confirmatory tests designated to confirm an impairment and the “recommended” confirmatory tests only include non-imaging procedures, at least one of these tests should be positive to confirm the impairment. The greater the number of tests that are positive, the greater the confidence that the correct diagnosis has been established.

2.12 Example: Under Body Part C., Cardiac, the diagnostic confirmatory tests for ventricular ectopy, a cardiac arrhythmia, include the following “recommended” tests:

A. Medical record review, i.e., a review of the claimant's medical records, or

B. Holter monitoring, or

C. Provocative testing producing a definite arrhythmia.

2.13 In this situation, only one of the “recommended” confirmatory tests need be positive to confirm the impairment. However, the more tests that are positive, the stronger the support for the diagnosis.

2.14 In no circumstance will the Board require that an invasive test be performed to confirm an impairment. Several of the Confirmatory Tests which are described in the Tables are invasive and it is not the intention of the Board to suggest that these be performed. The inclusion of invasive tests in the Tables Confirmatory Tests section is intended to help the Board evaluate the significance of findings from such tests that may have already been performed and which are part of the submitted medical record.

2.15 If an employee's impairment(s) cannot be confirmed by use of the confirmatory tests listed in the Tables, it still may be confirmed by medical evidence described in section 220.27 of this part. However, if a claimant's impairment(s) cannot be confirmed through use of the Tables or under section 220.27, and the medical evidence is complete and in concordance, the claimant will be found not disabled.

3. Disability Determination

3.01 Once the Board determines that the employee's regular railroad occupation is covered by one of the Job Titles in the Tables and that his or her alleged impairment fits into a Body Part covered by the Tables and can be confirmed, we examine the results of any of the disability tests listed under the impairment. If the results from any of these tests indicate a “D” finding, the employee is found disabled. If none of the test results indicate a “D” finding, then the employee's claim is evaluated using ICE.

3.02 Example: A trainman has angina as confirmed by the recommended tests under Body Part A: Cardiac—Angina. An echocardiogram shows that he has poor ejection fraction ≤35%. The employee is rated disabled. If none of the results of the listed disability tests match the results required for a “D” finding, then the employee's claim is evaluated under ICE.

Tables

A. Cancer

B. Endocrine

C. Cardiac

D. Respiratory

E. Lumbar Sacral Spine

F. Cervical Spine

G. Shoulder and Elbow

H. Hand and Arm

I. Hip

J. Knee

K. Ankle and Foot

A. Cancer Cancer

Cancer conditions can be viewed as belonging to one of three categories.

Category 1: Significant impact on functional capacity or anticipated life span.

Category 2: Intermediate impact on functional capacity; large individual variability.

Category 3: No significant impact on functional capacity or expected life span.

The factors that are considered in developing these categories include the following:

Type of Cancer

The functional impact of different malignancies varies tremendously and each malignancy has to be considered on an individual basis.

Magnitude of Disease

The disability standards are based upon the magnitude or extent of disease. The extent of disease affects both anticipated life span and the functional capacity or work ability of the individual. Localized cancer including cancer “in situ” can frequently be completely cured and not have an impact on functional capacity or life span. In contrast, many cancers that have distant or significant regional spread generally have a poor prognosis. The magnitude or extent of disease is classified into three categories: local, regional and distant.

The criteria which are used to classify a cancer into one of the three categories are based upon the distillation of several staging methods into a single system [Miller, et al. (1992). Cancer Statistics Review, 1973-1989; NIH Publication No. 92-2789].

Effects of Treatment

Although some types of cancer may be potentially curable with radical surgery and/or radiation therapy, the treatment regimen may result in a significant impairment that could affect functional capacity and ability to work. For example, a person with a laryngeal tumor which had spread regionally could be cured by a complete laryngectomy and radiotherapy. However, this treatment could result in a loss of speech and significantly impair the individual's communicative skills or ability to use certain types of respiratory protective equipment.

Prognosis

Some cancers may have minimal impact on a person's functional capacity, but have a very poor prognosis with respect to life expectancy. For example, an individual with early stage brain cancer may be minimally impaired, but have a poor prognosis and minimal potential for surviving longer than two years. Five and two year survival data are presented in the Cancer Disability Guideline Table which follows.

The Cancer Disability Guideline Table provides information concerning the probability of survival for five years for local, regional, and distant disease for each type of malignancy. In addition, two-year survival data are also presented for all disease stages. The five-year survival data are based upon data collected from population-based registries in Connecticut, New Mexico, Utah, Hawaii, Atlanta, Detroit, Seattle and the San Francisco and East Bay area between 1983 and 1987 (Miller, 1992). The two-year data are from a cohort study initially diagnosed in 1988.

Assessment

The malignancies are classified as disabling (Category 1), potentially disabling (Category 2) and non-disabling (Category 3). Category 2 conditions must be evaluated with respect to how the worker's tumor affects the worker's ability to perform the job and an assessment of his life span.

Information concerning the potential impact of the malignancy on a worker's ability to perform a job is identified in the Functional Impact column in the table. All railroad occupations in the Tables are considered together. Functional impacts are classified as significant if the treatment or sequelae from treatment including radiotherapy, chemotherapy and/or surgery is likely to impair the worker from performing the job. If the treatment results in a significant impairment of another organ system, the individual should be evaluated for disability associated with impairment of that body part. For example, a person undergoing an amputation for a bone malignancy would have to be evaluated for an amputation of that body part. For many cancers, it is difficult to make generalizations regarding the level of impairment that will occur after the person has initiated or completed treatment. Nonsignificant impacts include those that are unlikely to have any effect on the individual's work capacity.

Job Information Forms [63 FR 7543, Feb. 13, 1998]