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 November 20, 2003. The hearing officer resolved the sole issue before her by deciding that the appellant (claimant) is not entitled to supplemental income benefits (SIBs) for the fourth quarter. The claimant appealed, arguing that during the qualifying period for the fourth quarter, he had a total inability to work. The respondent (carrier) responded, urging affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The parties stipulated that the claimant sustained a compensable injury on _____________; that he received an impairment rating of 24%; that he did not commute his impairment income benefits; and that the fourth quarter of SIBs ran from May 16 to August 14, 2003, with a corresponding qualifying period of February 1 to May 2, 2003. Section 408.142(a) and Tex. W.C. Comm’n, 28 TEX. ADMIN. CODE §130.102 (Rule 130.102) set out the statutory and administrative rule requirements for SIBs. At issue in this case is whether the claimant met the good faith job search requirement of Section 408.142(a)(4) by showing that he had a total inability to work during the qualifying period for the fourth 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 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.
The hearing officer did not err in determining that the claimant did not satisfy the good faith requirement of Rule 130.102(d)(4) by demonstrating that he had no ability to work in the relevant qualifying period. The hearing officer was not persuaded that the evidence presented by the claimant was sufficient to satisfy the requirements of Rule 130.102(d)(4). Specifically, the hearing officer determined that there was not a narrative that specifically explained how the claimant’s injury caused a total inability to work and that other records showed that the claimant had some ability to work in the relevant qualifying period. Nothing in our review of the record reveals that the hearing officer’s determinations in that regard are so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. As such, no sound basis exists for us to disturb the hearing officer’s good faith determination, or the determination that the claimant is not entitled to SIBs for the fourth quarter, on appeal. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. 1986).
The hearing officer’s decision and order are affirmed.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
GARY SUDOL
9330 LBJ FREEWAY, SUITE 1200
DALLAS, TEXAS 75243.
Elaine M. Chaney
CONCUR:
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge
Margaret L. Turner – Appeals Judge