This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). A contested case hearing was held on May 5, 2004. The hearing officer resolved the disputed issue by deciding that the appellant (claimant) is not entitled to supplemental income benefits (SIBs) for the 13th quarter. The claimant appealed, essentially on sufficiency of the evidence grounds. The respondent (carrier) responded, urging affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
Eligibility criteria for SIBs entitlement are set forth in Section 408.142(a) and Tex. W.C. Comm’n, 28 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 130.102 (Rule 130.102). The SIBs criterion in issue is whether the claimant made a good faith effort to obtain employment commensurate with his ability to work during the qualifying periods for the 13th quarter. Rule 130.102(d)(4) provides that an injured employee has made a good faith effort to obtain employment commensurate with the employee’s ability to work if the employee has been unable to perform any type of work in any capacity, has provided a narrative report from a doctor which specifically explains how the injury causes a total inability to work, and no other records show that the injured employee is able to return to work. Rule 130.102(e) provides in part that, except as provided in subsection (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4) of Rule 130.102, an injured employee who has not returned to work and is able to return to work in any capacity shall look for employment commensurate with his or her ability to work every week of the qualifying period and document his or her job search efforts. That subsection then lists information to be considered in determining whether a good faith effort has been made.
Although the hearing officer found that there was a narrative which specifically explained how the injury caused a total inability to work, he also found that there were other records which showed that the claimant had some ability to work during the qualifying period. Further, the hearing officer found that the claimant documented job contacts, but did not make a good faith effort to find employment commensurate with his ability to work. The hearing officer noted in his discussion of the evidence that the claimant’s job search was made only for the purpose of satisfying the adjuster, not for the purpose of finding work.
The hearing officer is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Section 410.165(a). As the finder of fact, the hearing officer resolves the conflicts in the evidence and determines what facts have been established. We conclude that the hearing officer’s decision is supported by sufficient evidence and that it is not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).
We affirm the decision and order of the hearing officer.
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
CT CORPORATION SYSTEMS
350 NORTH ST. PAUL STREET
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.
Margaret L. Turner
CONCUR:
Judy L. S. Barnes – Appeals Judge
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge