This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). A contested case hearing (CCH) was held on May 12, 2014, with the record closing on June 30, 2014, in Lufkin, Texas, with [hearing officer] presiding as hearing officer. The hearing officer resolved the disputed issues by deciding that: (1) the compensable injury of [Date of Injury], extends to a left knee dislocation; (2) the appellant (claimant) reached maximum medical improvement (MMI) on January 4, 2013; and (3) the claimant’s impairment rating (IR) is four percent. The claimant appealed, disputing the hearing officer’s determinations of MMI and IR. The claimant contends that she has instability in her knee and that the doctor whose certification was adopted did not take range of motion measurements of her knee. The respondent (carrier) responded, urging affirmance of the disputed determinations of MMI and IR.
The hearing officer’s determination that the compensable injury of [Date of Injury], extends to a left knee dislocation was not appealed and has become final pursuant to Section 410.169.
DECISION
Reversed and remanded for reconstruction of the record.
Section 410.203(a)(1) requires the Appeals Panel to consider the record at the CCH. The appeal file contains one compact disc (CD). The CD reflects that it is thirty-five minutes and twenty-five seconds long but contains no audible arguments or testimony. The file does not contain a transcript or a tape recording of the CCH proceeding. Consequently, we reverse and remand this case to the hearing officer who presided over the initial CCH, if possible, for reconstruction of the CCH record. See Appeals Panel Decision (APD) 060353, decided April 12, 2006. No new evidence should be admitted on remand. See APD 031163, decided June 17, 2003, and APD 041970 decided October 4, 2004.
Pending resolution of the remand, a final decision has not been made in this case. However, since reversal and remand necessitate the issuance of a new decision and order by the hearing officer, a party who wishes to appeal from such new decision must file a request for review not later than 15 days after the date on which such new decision is received from the Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers’ Compensation, pursuant to Section 410.202 which was amended June 17, 2001, to exclude Saturdays and Sundays and holidays listed in Section 662.003 of the Texas Government Code in the computation of the 15-day appeal and response periods. See APD 060721, decided June 12, 2006.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is SENTRY CASUALTY COMPANY and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
CT CORPORATION SYSTEM
1999 BRYAN STREET, SUITE 900
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.
Margaret L. Turner
Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Veronica L. Ruberto
Appeals Judge
Carisa Space-Beam
Appeals Judge