|This information is provided free of charge by the Department of Industrial Relations from its web site at www.dir.ca.gov. These regulations are for the convenience of the user and no representation or warranty is made that the information is current or accurate. See full disclaimer at http://www.dir.ca.gov/od_pub/disclaimer.html.|
(a) In any investigation that the Administrative Director deems appropriate, the Administrative Director, or his or her designee, may mitigate a penalty amount imposed under section 9792.12 after considering each of these factors:
(1) The medical consequences or gravity of the violation(s);
(2) The good faith of the claims administrator or utilization review organization. Mitigation for good faith shall be determined based on documentation of attempts to comply with the Labor Code and regulations and shall result in a reduction of 20% for each applicable penalty;
(3) The history of previous penalties;
(4) The frequency of violations found during the investigation giving rise to a penalty;
(5) Penalties may be mitigated outside the above mitigation guidelines in extraordinary circumstances, when strict application of the mitigation guidelines would be clearly inequitable; and
(6) In the event an objection or appeal is filed pursuant to subsection 9792.15 of these regulations, whether the claims administrator or utilization review organization abated the alleged violation within the time period specified by the Administrative Director or his or her designee.
(b) The Administrative Director, or his or her designee, may assess both an administrative penalty under Labor Code section 4610 and a civil penalty under subdivision (e) of Labor Code section 129.5 based on the same violation(s).
(c) The Administrative Director, or his or her designee, shall not collect payment for an administrative penalty under Labor Code section 4610 from both the utilization review organization and the claims administrator for an assessment based on the same violation(s).
(d) Where an injured worker's or a requesting provider's refusal to cooperate in the utilization review process has prevented the claims administrator or utilization review organization from determining whether there is a legal obligation to perform an act, the Administrative Director, or his or her designee, may forego a penalty assessment for any related act or omission. The claims administrator or utilization review organization shall have the burden of proof in establishing both the refusal to cooperate and that such refusal prevented compliance with the relevant applicable statute or regulation.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 133, 4610 and 5307.3, Labor Code. Reference: Sections 129, 129.5, 4062, 4600, 4600.4, 4604.5, 4610 and 4614, Labor Code.
1. New section filed 6-7-2007; operative 6-7-2007 pursuant to GovernmentCode section 11343.4 (Register 2007, No. 23).
Go Back to Article 5.5.1 Table of Contents