Title: 

APD 030722

Significant Decision

Date: 

May 12, 2003

Issues: 

SIBS-7th Quarter

Table of Contents

APD 030722

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 February 19, 2003. The hearing officer determined that the (appellant) claimant is entitled to supplemental income benefits (SIBs) for the second compensable quarter, but not for the seventh quarter. The claimant appeals the adverse determination. The respondent (carrier) urges affirmance.

DECISION

Affirmed.

Section 408.142(a) outlines the requirements for SIBs eligibility as follows:

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.

Tex. W.C. Comm’n, 28 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 130.102(d)(5) (Rule 130.102(d)(5)) provides, in pertinent part, that an injured employee has made the required good faith effort if the employee “has provided sufficient documentation as described in subsection (e) of this section to show that he or she has made a good faith effort to obtain employment.” Subsection (e) further provides that the injured worker “who 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.” Whether the claimant satisfied the good faith requirement for SIBs entitlement as provided for in Rule 130.102(e) was a factual question for the hearing officer to resolve. Nothing in our review of the record indicates that the hearing officer’s decision is so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986).

The decision and order of the hearing officer are affirmed.

The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is

CT CORPORATION SYSTEM

350 NORTH ST. PAUL STREET

DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.

Chris Cowan

CONCUR:

Veronica L. Ruberto – Appeals Judge

Edward Vilano – Appeals Judge