Title: 

APD 032391

Significant Decision

Date: 

October 27, 2003

Issues: 

Income Benefit Rt. Calculation, SIB-Amount of Weekly Earnings, SIBS-9th & Subsequent Quarters

Table of Contents

APD 032391

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 August 20, 2003. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) is not entitled to supplemental income benefits (SIBs) for the ninth compensable quarter; that the claimant’s weekly earnings to be used to determine the SIBs rate for the qualifying period corresponding to the ninth quarter cannot be determined; and that the SIBs rate for the ninth quarter cannot be determined. The claimant appeals these determinations. The respondent (carrier) urges affirmance of the hearing officer’s decision.

DECISION

Affirmed.

Section 408.142 provides that an employee continues to be entitled to SIBs after the first compensable quarter if the employee: (1) has not returned to work or has earned less than 80% of the employee’s average weekly wage as a direct result of the impairment; and (2) has in good faith sought employment commensurate with her ability to work. Tex. W.C. Comm’n, 28 TEX. ADMIN. CODE §130.102(d)(1) (Rule 130.102(d)(1)), applicable in this case, 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 returned to work in a position which is relatively equal to the injured employee’s ability to work. Whether the claimant satisfied the good faith requirement for SIBs entitlement was a question of fact for the hearing officer to resolve. Section 410.165(a) provides that the contested case 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. The hearing officer noted that the claimant was not forthcoming about matters essential to determining the issues in question and issued a decision adverse to the claimant. 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 and 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 INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is

CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY

800 BRAZOS, SUITE 750, COMMODORE 1

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701.

Chris Cowan – Appeals Judge

CONCUR:

Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge

Gary L. Kilgore – Appeals Judge