The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal’s decision awarding $10,500 for the cost of catastrophic impairment assessments. Adjudicator Boyce denied the reconsideration request. He concluded that the proposed assessments were not “rebuttal reports” because it was the claimant’s first set of catastrophic impairment assessments (the insurer had conducted earlier IEs, but that did not make the claimant’s proposed assessments “rebuttal reports”). Although the OCF-19 was submitted prior to the claimant’s proposed assessments, the proposed assessments were still “for the purpose” of determining a catastrophic impairment.
