In liability and compensation, further providing for schedule of compensation.
Summary
SB1151 amends Pennsylvania’s Workers’ Compensation Act to change who may perform the medical examination used to determine whether an injured worker remains totally disabled after receiving 104 weeks of total disability compensation. Under current law, the impairment evaluation must be performed by a physician licensed in Pennsylvania, certified by an approved medical board or osteopathic equivalent, and active in clinical practice for at least 20 hours per week. The bill removes the requirement that the physician be active in clinical practice for at least 20 hours per week.
The bill keeps the rest of the impairment-rating process in place. The examination would still be requested by the insurer within 60 days after the 104-week period, and the impairment determination would still be made under the American Medical Association’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 6th edition, by a physician chosen by agreement of the parties or designated by the department. The bill takes effect 60 days after enactment.
Impact
SB1151 would narrow the qualification requirements for physicians conducting impairment evaluations in Pennsylvania workers’ compensation cases by eliminating the clinical-practice-hours requirement. This could expand the pool of eligible evaluators, potentially affecting how insurers, employers, injured workers, and the Department of Labor and Industry administer post-104-week disability reviews under Section 306(a.3)(1) of the Workers’ Compensation Act.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears technical and administrative rather than broadly controversial. Its likely appeal is to simplify the selection of qualified evaluators and reduce barriers to scheduling impairment examinations, while preserving the existing impairment-rating framework.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be whether removing the 20-hours-per-week clinical practice requirement weakens the reliability or independence of impairment evaluations, versus whether it simply increases access to qualified physicians and reduces delays. Employers and insurers may favor the broader evaluator pool for administrative flexibility, while injured workers or labor advocates may worry that loosening the standard could affect the fairness or consistency of impairment determinations.