This case returns following our remand in Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 011895, decided September 20, 2001, where we remanded the case for the required carrier information. That information was placed in the record and forwarded to the appellant (claimant). The hearing officer reissued his prior decision and order without substantive modification. With respect to the issue before him, the hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) is not entitled to supplemental income benefits (SIBs) for the 14th quarter. In his appeal, the claimant essentially argues that the hearing officer’s determinations that he did not make a good faith effort to look for work commensurate with his ability to work, that his unemployment is not a direct result of his impairment, and that he is not entitled to SIBs for the 14th quarter are against the great weight of the evidence. In its response to the claimant’s appeal, the respondent (self-insured) urges affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The parties stipulated that the claimant sustained a compensable injury on ___________; that he was assigned a 17% impairment rating for his compensable injury; that he did not commute his impairment income benefits; and that the 14th quarter ran from May 1 to July 31, 2001, with a corresponding qualifying period of January 19 to April 18, 2001. 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).
Rule 130.102(e) provides that 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. In the instant case, the hearing officer determined that the claimant did not satisfy the good faith requirement by conducting a good faith job search. The hearing officer was not persuaded that the claimant’s job search efforts were conducted in good faith in an attempt to return to work. Our review of the record does not reveal that the hearing officer’s determination in that regard is so against the great weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Thus, no sound basis exists for us to reverse that determination on appeal. Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex. 1986); Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).
The question of whether the claimant had established that his unemployment was a direct result of his impairment is also a question of fact for the hearing officer. In this instance, as the hearing officer noted, the record did not include documentary evidence as to the nature of the claimant’s injury or his restrictions. Rather, the claimant relied on testimony, which the hearing officer, as the fact finder, was free to discredit. The hearing officer was not persuaded that the claimant sustained his burden of proving direct result and his determination in that regard is not so against the great weight of the evidence as to compel its reversal on appeal. Having affirmed the hearing officer’s good faith and direct result determinations, no basis exists for us to reverse the ultimate determination that the claimant is not entitled to SIBs for the 14th quarter.
The hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
ROBERT CHAPA, RISK MANAGER
201 LINDENWOOD
LAREDO, TEXAS 78045.
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge
Robert W. Potts – Appeals Judge