Appeals : Arbitrator Decisions : #132 - March 15, 2004

D E C I S I O N

Background:

1. On November 18, 2002, the Administrator denied the claim for compensation as a Primarily-Infected Person pursuant to the Transfused HCV Plan on the basis that the Claimant had not provided sufficient evidence that she was infected for the first time with HCV by a blood transfusion received in Canada within the Class Period.

2. The Claimant requested a documentary review by an Arbitrator to review the decision of the Administrator. The main thrust of her appeal was to obtain an analysis of both units of blood, which were transfused.

3. On June 12, 2003 it was reported that a second unit of blood had in fact been transfused and the Administrator initiated a traceback in respect of the same.

4. On June 20, 2003 Canadian Blood Services reported that the traceback had been completed and the donor had tested negative. The denial of the Administrator was accordingly maintained.

5. I asked the Claimant on July 2 and August 20, 2003 if she desired to continue with her appeal. On October 20, 2003 she advised that she wished me to request a copy of the chart of her oral surgeon, Dr. Dobrovolsky, to ascertain any transfusion occurred during dental surgery. She was asked to provide a consent authorization form for the release of that chart.

6. The Claimant was asked on November 12, 2003 to forward the consent authorization form and the same was received on November 21, 2003 and transmitted to Dr. Dobrovolsky by letter of the same date.

7. A follow up letter was issued to Dr. Dobrovolsky on January 6, 2004. His office advised on January 8, 2004 that their records are maintained for a period of only 10 years and they have no record of treating her. In any case, none of their surgical procedures are conducted in their office but only at a hospital.

8. On January 9, 2004 I inquired if the Claimant could provide any other particulars as to the date of any oral surgery at any hospital and under any other versions of her name.

9. I conversed with the Claimant during the month of January 2004 and I inquired whether she desired any further discussions in relation to the documentation or whether it was in order to proceed to issue a written decision. I indicated that if nothing further was heard from her within the next 30-day period following January 30, 2004 that I would assume it was in order to issue a final decision.

10. That time period has since elapsed without further communication from the Claimant.

11. The Claimant resides in Grande Prairie, Alberta and did receive two units of transfused blood at the Queen Elizabeth II Hospital on January 24, 1986.

12. Dr. D.J.Williams of the Queen Elizabeth II Hospital confirmed that one unit of blood was transfused and that the other was not required, but was returned and discarded.

13. As a result of the Claimant’s inquiry, it is now confirmed that both units were transfused; however pursuant to section 3.04 of the Plan and the Court Approved Traceback Protocol, a traceback procedure was followed to determine whether the blood in question was the source of her infection.

14.Canadian Blood Services conducted the traceback and provided the results in a letter dated February 4, 2002. and a subsequent letter dated June 20, 2003.

15. The traceback procedures have established on the balance of probabilities that these units of blood were not the source of her infection.

16. The Claimant has offered no further or additional evidence to suggest otherwise.

17. I have performed further searches for the Claimant but have found no evidence to show on a balance of probabilities or otherwise, that she was infected for the first time with HCV by a blood transfusion received in Canada during the Class Period.

18. Accordingly, I uphold the Administrator’s denial of the Claimant’s request for compensation.

Dated at Edmonton, Alberta, this 15 day of March, 2004.

__________________________________

Shelley L. Miller, Q.C.

Arbitrator