This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). This case is back before us after our remand in Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 011835, decided September 21, 2001. In Appeal No. 011835 we had remanded for the hearing officer to obtain the carrier service information in compliance with HB 2600, effective June 17, 2001. The hearing officer complied with the remand and obtained this information. On remand the hearing officer reissued essentially the same decision as she issued after the contested case hearing, which was held on July 19, 2001. In her decision the hearing officer resolved the issues before her by determining that the appellant (claimant herein) was not entitled to supplemental income benefits (SIBs) for the 9th and 10th compensable quarters. The claimant appeals, contending that she was entitled to these benefits; and the respondent (carrier herein) replies that the decision of the hearing officer should be affirmed.
DECISION
Finding sufficient evidence to support the decision of the hearing officer and no reversible error in the record, we affirm the decision and order of the hearing officer.
Section 408.142(a) outlines the requirements for SIBs eligibility as follows:
(a)An employee is entitled to [SIBs] if on the expiration of the impairment income benefit [IIBs] period computed under Section 408.121(a)(1) the employee:
(1)has an impairment rating of 15 percent or more as determined by this subtitle from the compensable injury;
(2)has not returned to work or has returned to work earning less than 80 percent of the employee’s average weekly wage as a direct result of the employee’s impairment;
(3)has not elected to commute a portion of the [IIBs] under Section 408.128; and
(4)has attempted in good faith to obtain employment commensurate with the employee’s ability to work.
The hearing officer found that the claimant failed to make a good faith effort to seek employment during the qualifying periods for the 9th and 10th compensable quarters. We have previously held that the question of whether the claimant made a good faith job search is a question of fact. Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 94150, decided March 22, 1994; Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 94533, decided June 14, 1994. Section 410.165(a) provides that the hearing officer, as finder of fact, is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence as well as of the weight and credibility that is to be given the evidence. It was for the hearing officer, as trier of fact, to resolve the inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701, 702 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). When reviewing a hearing officer’s decision for factual sufficiency of the evidence we should reverse such decision only if it is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust and we do not find it to be so in this case. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex. 1986).
The decision and order of the hearing officer are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is POTOMAC INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
C. J. FIELDS
5910 N. CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, STE. 500
DALLAS, TEXAS 75206.
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge