Workers’ Compensation · Primary-source case analysis

Boughner: A Record-Based Attack Did Not Overcome the 2005 Rating Schedule’s Presumed Validity

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published May 19, 2026

Decision: Boughner v. CompUSA, No. SFO 0491230 (WCAB June 2, 2008) (en banc).

Scott Boughner v. CompUSA examined a renewed challenge to the 2005 rating schedule on a fuller evidentiary record after the Board’s earlier Costa decision.

The schedule remained presumptively valid

The challenger bore the burden of overcoming the legal presumption attached to the administrative regulation and scheduled rating.

The rulemaking record mattered

The Board examined the materials used by the administrative director, including RAND data, instead of treating later disagreement with the methodology as proof of invalidity.

Expert criticism did not establish arbitrariness

The applicant’s proof did not demonstrate that the administrative director acted without a rational evidentiary basis or outside the governing statutory factors.

The case returned for a scheduled rating

The Board amended the WCJ’s contrary finding and returned the matter for the worker’s permanent disability to be rated under the 2005 schedule.

Key takeaways

• Define whether the challenge attacks the regulation or a case-specific rating.
• Build the complete administrative and evidentiary record.
• Connect expert criticism to the governing statutory standard.
• Request case-specific rebuttal where a systemic invalidity claim cannot be proved.