DWC Requests Comments on SIBs Rule Proposal

DWC has formally proposed amendments to the SIBs rule to “align the rule text with the statutory text.” Those can be located on the DWC website (https://www.tdi.texas.gov/wc/rules/proposedrules/documents/pr130sibs0825m.pdf), or via this link:

https://www.tdi.texas.gov/wc/rules/proposedrules/documents/pr130sibs0825.pdf

The DWC proposes amendments to DWC Rule 130.102, which governs eligibility for supplemental income benefits (SIBs). The changes bring the rule into consistency with Texas Labor Code §408.1415 by:

• • • Adding explicit references to submitting job applications, as required by statute.
    • Defining “job application” as information submitted to an employer or representative for a specific position, which may be in physical or electronic form and need not be limited to a form.
    • Clarifying references to work search efforts.

According to the DWC, the amendments are intended to remove confusion caused by differences between the rule and statute, ensure clear standards for documenting job applications, and improve clarity through plain language and editorial updates. Recipients of SIBs must continue to demonstrate active efforts to gain employment through vocational rehabilitation, Texas Workforce Commission work search programs, or job applications.

The DWC requests public comments on the proposal, including information related to the cost, benefit, or effect of the proposal and any applicable data, research, and analysis. DWC will consider any written comments on the proposal that DWC receives no later than 5:00 p.m., Central time, on October 6, 2025. Send your comments to RuleComments@tdi.texas.gov; or to Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers’ Compensation, Legal Services, MCLS, P.O. Box 12050, Austin, TX 78711-2050.

These amendments are proposed in light of the successful suit against the DWC concerning its interpretation of Rule 130.102. The court rejected the argument that Rule 130.102 was invalid for authorizing a fourth method of establishing entitlement to Supplemental Income Benefits in conflict with Labor Code §408.1415(a)(3). However, the court held that the preamble to the rule constituted invalid ad hoc rulemaking and that the Appeals Panel had been misinterpreting both the statute and the rule. Specifically, the statute does not support defining “job applications” as “work search contacts,” and the preamble’s interpretation equating the two terms created a new rule of general applicability that effectively amended subsections (d)(1)(D) and (f).

Although the rule challenge was unsuccessful, the need for amendment is not immediately evident. The carrier appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that ambiguity in the rule continued to allow an improper interpretation. While the Court denied the petition for review, a published concurrence observed that the issue might not be resolved and should instead be presented through a case involving an actual misapplication of the statute, rather than a facial challenge. The proposed revisions appear intended to reduce that risk and forestall further litigation.

We will continue to keep you updated on changes to the SIBs rules.  In the meantime, please reach out to us with any questions at all: GQS@fol.com.