In Crisman v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Cytemp Specialty Steel), 740 A.2d 767, 769 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1999), the Court, sitting en banc, affirmed the Board's grant of a termination petition when the claimant refused a no-duty work position that was within his "physical capabilities, as determined by the WCJ" because he thought it was demeaning. Crisman, 740 A.2d at 769. The Court concluded that such a refusal was not one in good faith under Kachinski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Vepco Construction Co.). Id.