Commissioner Suspends Part of SSA's Proposed Appeals Changes

The Social Security Commissioner has announced that he is suspending the rulemaking process with respect to the centerpiece of a proposed rule that sought to make changes to the Social Security appeals process.

Social Security Commissioner Michael J. Astrue announced that he is suspending the rulemaking process with respect to the centerpiece of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that sought to make changes to the Social Security appeals process.  72 Fed. Reg. 61218 (Oct. 29, 2007).  See NSCLC Washington Weekly, Nov. 9, 2007. 

The Commissioner announced that he will delay issuance of final regulations on the provision requiring that all evidence be submitted at least five business days in advance of an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) hearing and the companion provision which would close the record on appeal upon conclusion of the ALJ hearing.  The announcement came in a January 29 letter addressed to Rep. Michael R. McNulty, Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security, in which Astrue recognized “legitimate concerns…regarding the availability of medical records” within the proposed time limit.  Read a copy of Astrue's letter (PDF)

Astrue’s letter makes it clear that he does not wish to abandon the idea of time limits on submission of evidence and closing the record on appeal, but instead to explore ways to obtain evidence in more timely fashion.  To this end, he has asked the Social Security Administration Inspector General to give him a report on this problem, and has written to the American Medical Association and the American Hospital Association asking them to address the problem. He also suggests it is time for Congress to look at the issue.

The NPRM provoked an extraordinary volume of comments from the disability and aging communities, almost universally opposed to the time limits as well as other aspects of the NPRM.  It also attracted the opposition of the House leadership as well as several Senators.  It should be noted that many commenters had additional reasons for opposing the time limits which the Commissioner does not address.  These include the problems of unrepresented claimants and the problem of claimants who make a rational decision to pursue a claim on their own through the early stages and then realize they need an attorney when the hearing date approaches.  For more information, contact Gerald McIntyre in NSCLC’s Los Angeles office.

Read NSCLC's submitted comments in response to the proposed rule (PDF)