v.
Director Office of Workers Compensation Programs U
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
_____________
No. 23-1481
_____________
KEYSTONE COAL MINING CORPORATION;
CONSOL ENERGY, INCORPORATED,
Petitioners
v.
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; MICHAEL W. CHONCEK
_____________
On Petition for Review of an
Order of the Benefits Review Board
(Agency Case No. 22-00153 BLA)
Administrative Law Judge: Drew A. Swank
_____________
Argued April 3, 2024
Before: RESTREPO, MATEY and McKEE, Circuit Judges.
(Filed: April 24, 2024)
_____________
Christopher L. Wildfire [ARGUED]
Toni Williams
Sutter Williams
850 Ridge Avenue
Suite 300
Pittsburgh, PA 15212
Counsel for Petitioners
Haley L. Carter [ARGUED]
Timothy C. MacDonnell [ARGUED]
Washington & Lee University School of Law
Room 106
1 E Denny Circle
Lexington, VA 24450
Counsel for Respondent
_____________
OPINION *
_____________
MATEY, Circuit Judge.
Keystone Coal Mining Corporation and Consol Energy, Incorporated (together, “Keystone”) petition for review of an order from the United States Department of Labor Benefits Review Board (“Board”) affirming the decision of an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) to award disability benefits to Michael Choncek. Because the determination is supported by substantial evidence and complies with applicable law, we will deny the petition for review. [1]
I.
Michael Choncek worked as an underground coal miner for over 20 years. In 2018, he filed a claim for benefits under the Black Lung Benefits Act, 30 U.S.C § 901 et seq., for coal workers’ pneumoconiosis (“CWP”), or black lung disease. Responding, the District Director of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs issued a proposed decision and order awarding benefits. Keystone requested a formal hearing, and an ALJ
* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and, pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7, does not constitute binding precedent.
[*2]confirmed the award. Following a remand by the Board, 2 the ALJ again found that Choncek was totally disabled and again confirmed the benefits award. The Board affirmed the ALJ’s decision, and Keystone now brings this petition for review. [3]
II.
To qualify for CWP benefits, a claimant must prove that he has pneumoconiosis from coal mine employment causing a totally disabling respiratory impairment. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 718.202–204. The claimant can invoke a rebuttable presumption of total disability caused by pneumoconiosis if he worked in underground coal mines for at least fifteen years, submitted a compliant chest X-ray that was negative for complicated pneumoconiosis, and “other evidence demonstrates the existence of a totally disabling respiratory or pulmonary impairment . . . .” App. 24; 30 U.S.C. § 921(c)(4). A totally disabling respiratory or pulmonary impairment prevents a claimant from performing his “usual coal mine work” or comparable employment. 20 C.F.R. § 718.204(b)(1).
A.
A claimant may prove total disability by submitting evidence that his pulmonary function tests or arterial blood-gas tests yield qualifying values under the Department of Labor’s regulations, or that he has been diagnosed with pneumoconiosis and cor pulmonale (pulmonary heart disease) with right-sided congestive heart failure. See 20 C.F.R. § 718.204(b)(2)(i–iii). Even absent such evidence, however, total disability can also be found “if a physician exercising reasoned medical judgment, based on medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques, concludes that a miner’s respiratory or pulmonary condition” qualified the worker as totally disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 718.204(b)(2)(iv).
[*3]Here, the ALJ found Choncek totally disabled based on the opinions of three of the five medical experts offered and concluded that Choncek would be unable to perform his usual work as a coal miner or something comparable. Keystone disagrees with the “reasoned medical judgment” of these physicians on whom the ALJ relied. 20 C.F.R. § 718.204(b)(2)(iv). But we decline to reweigh this evidence. See Rutherford v. Barnhart, 399 F.3d 546, 552 (3d Cir. 2005) (“In the process of reviewing the record for substantial evidence, we may not weigh the evidence or substitute our own conclusions for those of the fact-finder.”) (cleaned up).
B.
Nor do we see error in the ALJ’s conclusion that “after considering all of the evidence together,” App. 33, Keystone could not show Choncek had neither clinical nor legal pneumoconiosis. [4] Again, Keystone contests the ALJ’s evidentiary analysis, but disagreement does not make the ALJ’s decision irrational or unsupported. And Keystone did not demonstrate that “no part of [Choncek’s] respiratory or pulmonary total disability was caused by pneumoconiosis.” 20 C.F.R. § 718.305(d)(1)(ii). Three of the medical experts consulted by the ALJ attributed at least part of Choncek’s total pulmonary disability to pneumoconiosis, while Keystone’s two medical experts “did not offer an explanation” as to whether “pneumoconiosis caused [Choncek’s] total respiratory disability.” App. 12 n.10. The ALJ’s decision to pick which evidence to credit, and which to decline, is a discretionary function we will not disturb. See Rutherford, 399 F.3d at 552.
[*4]***
For these reasons, we will deny the petition for review.
[*5]