Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Disability Retirement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board receives training on disability‑retirement presumptions from counsel Vivian Schultz
Summary
Vivian Schultz, disability retirement counsel, briefed trustees on legacy and new statutory presumptions (heart, cancer, bloodborne infections, biochemical substances, PTSD, low back/duty‑belt and others), the prerequisites for each, time limits and issues for rebuttal and credibility.
The Imperial County Employees Retirement System board received a training session on March 19 about disability‑retirement presumptions from Vivian Schultz, counsel for disability retirement matters.
Schultz, who represents 1937 Act systems on disability retirement issues, reviewed the longstanding legacy presumptions (heart trouble, cancer, bloodborne infectious disease, biochemical substances) and a set of newer presumptions added by 2023 legislation, including post‑traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), low‑back impairments related to duty belts, skin cancer and others. She told trustees the presumptions apply only to service connection and that applicants still must prove permanent incapacity; once statutory prerequisites are met, the presumption shifts the burden of proof to the retirement association to rebut service connection.
Key points from the presentation
- Prerequisites: Most presumptions apply only to safety members or specified occupations and require that an applicant be permanently incapacitated. Many presumptions require five years of service as a threshold.
- Time limits: Several presumptions carry extended filing windows measured as three months for each full year of service, up to statutory ceilings (for example, the heart and cancer presumptions can extend filing times up to five years after termination of service; bloodborne‑disease rules extend to 60 months with a 90‑day special rule for MRSA).
- Cancer presumption: Requires proof of exposure to a known carcinogen on the job. Rebuttal strategies include identifying the primary tumor site and presenting medical literature or latency evidence to show the exposure did not cause the cancer.
- PTSD: The presumption covers active firefighters and peace officers engaged in active law‑enforcement duties; Schultz described cumulative PTSD and said traumatic exposures at work can exacerbate preexisting conditions. She noted psychiatric diagnosis and psychological testing play a significant role and that boards increasingly scrutinize credibility and test validity (malingering/symptom magnification).
- Low‑back/duty‑belt presumption: Applies to peace officers who wore a duty belt as a condition of employment and to resulting lower‑back impairments that develop while the member is in service. Schultz said the medical record and objective findings (range of motion, nerve impingement on MRI) remain important for proving permanent incapacity.
Schultz warned trustees that presumptions shift litigation dynamics by imposing a rebuttal burden on the retirement association and said boards should rely on careful medical analysis and well‑documented factual records when evaluating claims. She described presumptions as a policy choice by the Legislature to ease proof for certain disabilities affecting safety members and recommended trustees focus on substantial evidence standards when reviewing medical reports.
