## Facts

- Jackie Harcum, an employee of Newport News Shipbuilding, suffered a lower-back injury at work in 1984 when metal grating fell on him; he later underwent surgery for a herniated disc and experienced extended disability.
- Newport News paid benefits under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) and later returned Harcum to light-duty work; he ultimately was terminated because he could not perform essential tasks under medical restrictions.
- Harcum later obtained other employment and sought additional LHWCA compensation for the period between losing his job at Newport News and starting new work.
- An administrative law judge found Harcum partially (not totally) disabled for that interval and awarded partial disability benefits.
- The Benefits Review Board (BRB) affirmed the partial-disability determination and granted Newport News relief under 33 U.S.C. § 908(f), limiting the employer’s payment obligation to 104 weeks and shifting later liability to the LHWCA Special Fund administered by the Department of Labor.
- The Director of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (Director) petitioned for court of appeals review of (1) the denial of total disability benefits and (2) the § 908(f) relief.
- Harcum did not seek review and declined to intervene on his own behalf.
- The Fourth Circuit dismissed the Director’s petition as to the benefits-denial issue, holding the Director was not a “person adversely affected or aggrieved” under 33 U.S.C. § 921(c).

## Issues

1. Whether the Director, acting in a governmental capacity under the LHWCA, is a “person adversely affected or aggrieved” under 33 U.S.C. § 921(c) and therefore may seek judicial review of a BRB order denying additional benefits to a claimant who does not appeal.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the Fourth Circuit.
- The Court held the Director is not “adversely affected or aggrieved” within the meaning of § 921(c) when seeking review of a BRB decision denying benefits to a claimant who does not seek review.
- Because the Director lacked statutory standing, the Court did not reach the merits of the disability classification or the propriety of § 908(f) relief.

## Legal Principles

- The phrase “person adversely affected or aggrieved” in federal judicial-review provisions is a term of art that ordinarily does not include an administrative agency acting as regulator or administrator absent clear statutory authorization.
- An agency’s general interest in correct implementation of its statute, including increasing claimants’ awards, does not by itself create statutory standing to appeal under a “person adversely affected or aggrieved” standard.
- Oversight of, or administrative responsibility for, a statutory fund (including concern about the fund’s financial exposure) does not alone convert the administering agency into an aggrieved “person” under § 921(c) absent explicit congressional authorization.
- When Congress intends an agency to have appellate standing in its governmental capacity, it typically provides express authority; the absence of such language is strong evidence against agency standing.

## Conclusion

The Court held that § 921(c) does not authorize the Director to appeal a BRB decision denying additional compensation to a claimant who declines to seek review, limiting judicial review under the LHWCA to parties with their own legally cognizable stake unless Congress expressly provides otherwise.


Dir., Off. of Workers’ Comp. Programs, Dep’t of Lab. v. Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co., 514 U.S. 122 (1995)