Happeny, Robert

Applicant, a correctional officer, sustained multiple injuries (cumulative and specific) to numerous body parts and systems over his employment. The WCJ found applicant permanently and totally disabled based on two alternative theories: (1) an additive approach to combining permanent disability percentages, and (2) non-feasibility for vocational retraining; the WCJ also rejected all apportionment opinions as not constituting substantial evidence and issued an unapportioned award. Defendant sought reconsideration challenging the additive methodology under Vigil, the vocational reports, and the rejection of apportionment. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding of permanent total disability based solely on applicant's non-feasibility for vocational retraining, agreed that defendant failed to meet its burden of establishing apportionment, and declined to reach the additive-versus-CVC issue as unnecessary. The Board granted reconsideration only to amend and restate the F&A to rest the PTD finding on vocational non-feasibility rather than the additive approach.