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 July 6, 2004. The hearing officer determined that the appellant (claimant) is not entitled to supplemental income benefits (SIBs) for the 14th quarter. The claimant appeals that determination as being contrary to the great weight of the evidence. In its response, the respondent (carrier) urges affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The parties stipulated that the claimant sustained a compensable injury on ______________; that he reached maximum medical improvement on December 13, 1999, with an impairment rating of 17%; that the claimant did not commute his impairment income benefits; and that the 14th quarter of SIBs ran from March 2 through May 31, 2004, with a corresponding qualifying period of November 19, 2003, through February 17, 2004. 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 14th 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.
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 qualifying period for the 14th quarter. 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 the claimant did not present a narrative report from a doctor that explained how the compensable injury caused a total inability to work and that other records show that the claimant had an ability to work. 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 determination that the claimant did not satisfy the good faith requirement under Rule 130.102(d)(4), or the determination that the claimant is not entitled to SIBs for the 14th 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 TEXAS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
RUSSELL OLIVER, PRESIDENT
221 WEST 6TH, SUITE 300
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701.
Elaine M. Chaney
Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Judy L. S. Barnes
Appeals Judge
Daniel R. Barry
Appeals Judge