Changes to Scheduling and Appearing at Hearings, 35926-35935 [2014-14793]
Download as PDF
35926
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 122 / Wednesday, June 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Commission on the date specified in the
scheduling notice. A prehearing brief
shall be signed and shall include a table
of contents. A prehearing brief shall be
filed electronically, and nine (9) true
paper copies shall be submitted (on
paper measuring 8.5 x 11 inches and
single-sided) on the same business day.
The prehearing brief should present a
party’s case concisely and shall, to the
extent possible, refer to the record and
include information and arguments
which the party believes relevant to the
subject matter of the Commission’s
determination.
■ 16. Amend § 207.67 by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 207.67 Posthearing briefs and
statements.
Final comments on information.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(b) The parties shall have an
opportunity to file comments on any
information disclosed to them after they
have filed their posthearing brief
pursuant to § 207.67. Comments shall be
filed electronically, and nine (9) true
paper copies shall be submitted on the
same business day. Comments shall
only concern such information, and
shall not exceed 15 pages of textual
material, double spaced and singlesided, when printed out on paper
measuring 8.5 x 11 inches and singlesided. A comment may address the
accuracy, reliability, or probative value
of such information by reference to
information elsewhere in the record, in
which case the comment shall identify
where in the record such information is
found. Comments containing new
factual information shall be disregarded.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:16 Jun 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
By order of the Commission.
Issued: June 19, 2014.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014–14675 Filed 6–24–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
(a) Briefs from parties. Any party to a
five-year review may file with the
Secretary a posthearing brief concerning
the information adduced at or after the
hearing within a time specified in the
scheduling notice or by the presiding
official at the hearing. A posthearing
brief shall be filed electronically, and
nine (9) true paper copies shall be
submitted on the same business day. No
such posthearing brief shall exceed
fifteen (15) pages of textual material,
double spaced and single sided, when
printed out on paper measuring 8.5 x 11
inches and single-sided. In addition, the
presiding official may permit persons to
file answers to questions or requests
made by the Commission at the hearing
within a specified time. The Secretary
shall not accept for filing posthearing
briefs or answers which do not comply
with this section.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 17. Amend § 207.68 by revising
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 207.68
The date on which such comments must
be filed will be specified by the
Commission when it specifies the time
that information will be disclosed
pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section.
The record shall close on the date such
comments are due, except with respect
to changes in bracketing of business
proprietary information in the
comments permitted by § 207.3(c).
20 CFR Parts 404, 405, and 416
[Docket No. 2011–0056]
RIN 0960–AH37
Changes to Scheduling and Appearing
at Hearings
Social Security Administration.
Final rules.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
These final rules explain how
a claimant may object to appearing at a
hearing via video teleconferencing, or to
the time and place of a hearing. These
final rules adopt, with further
clarification regarding our good cause
exception, the notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) that we published
in the Federal Register on June 27,
2013. We expect that these final rules
will have a minimal impact on the
public, help ensure the integrity of our
programs, and allow us to administer
our programs more efficiently.
DATES: These final rules are effective
July 25, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maren Weight, Social Security
Administration, 5107 Leesburg Pike,
Falls Church, VA 22041–3260, (703)
605–7100 for information about this
notice. For information on eligibility or
filing for benefits, call our national tollfree number, 1–800–772–1213 or TTY
1–800–325–0778, or visit our Internet
site, Social Security Online, at https://
www.socialsecurity.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
We are making final, with further
clarification regarding our good cause
exception, the proposed NPRM that we
published in the Federal Register on
June 27, 2013.1 As we discussed in the
1 The NPRM is available at: https://www.gpo.gov/
fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-06-27/pdf/2013-14894.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
preamble to the NPRM, our workloads
at the administrative law judge (ALJ)
hearing level continue to grow, and we
are implementing final rules that will
help us provide better service by
allowing us to conduct hearings and
issue decisions more expeditiously.
Objecting to Appearing by Video
Teleconferencing
As we explained in the NPRM, we
have conducted hearings by video
teleconferencing since 2003. Over the
last decade, we found that hearings held
by video teleconferencing help reduce
our average processing time, reduce
travel expenses, and allow us to better
serve the public. Therefore, we have
continued to improve our video
teleconferencing capabilities, added five
National Hearing Centers that hold
hearings exclusively by video
teleconferencing, and increased the
number of ALJs in traditional hearing
offices who hold hearings by video
teleconferencing.
However, we reiterate in these final
rules that while we have taken
significant strides in increasing our
video teleconferencing capacity, we
remain concerned that some individuals
are manipulating our rules in order to
obtain a hearing with an ALJ with a
higher allowance rate. As we previously
noted, this may be an unintended
consequence of our commitment to
transparency as we make more
information, such as an ALJ’s allowance
rates, available to claimants and their
representatives. Until the effective date
of this final rule, these types of efforts
to undermine the random assignment of
ALJs have generally been successful.
Our business process has been to
reschedule a hearing if the claimant, or
a representative on a claimant’s behalf,
objected to appearing by video
teleconferencing at any time before or at
the hearing, or to transfer a case if a
claimant indicated he or she moved
closer to another hearing office.
Our continued concerns about efforts
to undermine our rules are not merely
anecdotal. At the time of this final rule,
we brought and pursued sanction
actions against an appointed
representative for misrepresenting facts
in order to have cases transferred to a
hearing office with a higher allowance
rate. We have observed some
individuals decline hearings by video
teleconferencing after learning that the
claimant is scheduled to appear before
an ALJ with a lower allowance rate. We
have observed other questionable
conduct that, while not necessarily
constituting misconduct often delays
the processing of cases and prevents the
use of video teleconferencing
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 122 / Wednesday, June 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
technology in certain offices. We
continue to receive declinations less
than 20 days 2 before the date the
hearing, resulting in the loss of the
hearing slot that we could have used to
hold a hearing for another claimant.
Finally, when we receive a declination
for a hearing by video teleconferencing
after the hearing has been scheduled; we
must use additional administrative
resources to reschedule a hearing at a
time and place amenable to all hearing
participants. For these types of reasons,
a change to our current process was
necessary.
In this final rule, before we assign an
ALJ to the case or before we schedule a
hearing, we will notify a claimant that
he or she has the right to object to
appearing at the hearing by video
teleconferencing. If the claimant objects
to appearing at the hearing by video
teleconferencing, the claimant must tell
us in writing within 30 days after the
date he or she receives the notice,
unless he or she shows good cause for
missing the deadline. If we receive a
timely objection, or we find there was
good cause for missing the deadline, we
will schedule the claimant for an in
person hearing, with one limited
exception. If a claimant moves to a
different residence while his or her
request for a hearing is pending, we will
determine whether the claimant will
appear in person or by video
teleconferencing, even if the claimant
previously objected to appearing by
video teleconferencing. In addition, in
order for us to consider a change in
residence when scheduling a hearing,
the claimant must submit evidence
verifying a new residence. After we
receive evidence regarding the
claimant’s new residence, we will
decide how the claimant’s appearance
will be made. This limited exception to
the rule allows us to protect the
integrity of our programs while
providing us with the flexibility to
transfer cases when there is a legitimate
change in residence and we can process
the case more efficiently.
Time Period for Objecting to a Hearing
In these final rules, we also specified
the time period for objecting to the time
and place of a hearing. To ensure that
we have adequate time to prepare for
the hearing, we require that a claimant
notify us of an objection in writing at
the earliest possible opportunity, but
not later than 5 days before the date set
2 Our regulations require that we provide notice
of a hearing 20 days in advance. See 20 CFR
404.938 and 416.1438. Late declinations are even
more problematic in the Boston Region where we
are required to give notice 75 days in advance. See
20 CFR 405.316.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:16 Jun 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
for the hearing or, if earlier, 30 days
after receiving notice of the hearing. If
the claimant objects to the time and
place of the hearing outside of the
specified time period and fails to attend
the hearing, the ALJ will follow existing
sub-regulatory authority to develop
good cause for failure to appear. We also
adopted other minor revisions in the
final rules to clarify when we will
reschedule a hearing for good cause. For
instance, we removed the example that
a claimant might offer living closer to
another hearing site as a good cause
reason to object to the time and place of
the hearing.
Appearing at the Hearing by Telephone
To further reduce the need to
reschedule hearings and to improve our
efficiency, we provide that the ALJ may
determine that extraordinary
circumstances exist to schedule the
claimant, or any other party to the
hearing, to appear at the hearing by
telephone. For example, an ALJ will
direct a claimant or other party to the
hearing to appear by telephone when
the person’s appearance in person is not
possible, such as when the person is
incarcerated, the correctional facility
will not allow a hearing to be held at the
facility, and video teleconferencing is
not available. The flexibility in the final
rule allows us to continue the practice
of scheduling a hearing by telephone
when the claimant specifically requests
a hearing in this manner, and the ALJ
determines that extraordinary
circumstances prevent the claimant or
other party who makes the request from
appearing at the hearing in person or by
video teleconferencing.
As we noted in the NPRM, we spend
significant administrative resources
arranging in person hearings with
officials of correctional facilities. It also
reduces our productivity when an ALJ
travels to a confinement facility to hold
one or two hearings rather than
conducting a full hearing docket. These
final rules will save administrative
resources and allow us to provide more
timely hearings to all claimants because
the ALJ will be present in the hearing
office to conduct a full hearing docket.
Part 405
In the final rule, we adopted several
changes to Part 405 for consistency with
the rules in Parts 404 and 416. We
adopted changes relating to video
teleconferencing and hearing
appearances by telephone in
extraordinary circumstances, as
described above. For consistency with
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
35927
our pilot program 3 in all regions except
Boston, we also adopted changes
allowing the agency, rather than the
ALJ, to set the time and place for
hearing.
Public Comments on the NPRM
In the NPRM, we provided a 60-day
comment period, which ended on
August 26, 2013. We carefully
considered the 13 public comments we
received. Because some of the
comments were lengthy, we summarize
them below. We present the
commenters’ concerns and suggestions
and respond to the significant issues
relevant to this rulemaking. We do not
respond to comments, or portions of
comments, that are outside the scope of
this rulemaking proceeding.
Comment: One commenter indicated
that ALJs will not be able to adequately
see and observe claimants if they were
scheduled to appear via video
teleconferencing. Another commenter
argued that it is unfair if claimants have
to wait longer for in-person hearings.
Both commenters essentially argued that
hearings held by video teleconferencing
violate claimants’ due process rights.
Response: We disagree with the
concerns raised in these comments.
First, it is important to reiterate that
under these final rules claimants will
generally continue to have the right to
appear in person at a scheduled hearing
if they timely object to appearing via
video teleconferencing. Furthermore,
our regulations have allowed claimants
to appear via video teleconferencing at
our hearings since 2003.4 In our
experience holding hearings by video
teleconference, we have found that ALJs
are able to observe a claimant
adequately. As our resources permit, we
continue to improve our video
teleconferencing equipment for
hearings, and we manage cases as
effectively as possible to provide
claimants hearings in the timeliest
method available.
We also disagree with the
commenters’ concerns that a hearing
held by video teleconferencing can
adversely affect a claimant’s right to due
process. A number of Federal courts
have held that hearings conducted via
video teleconferencing adequately
protect a claimant’s due process rights.5
3 See 20 CFR 404.936(a) and (h), and 416.1436(a)
and (h).
4 68 FR 5210 and 68 FR 69003.
5 Lipp v. Astrue, No. 2:09–cv–991, 2010 WL
4719454 at *11 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 5, 2010) (Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation), adopted by
district court, 2010 WL 4718763 (S.D. Ohio
November 15, 2010), Evans v. Astrue, No. 4:08–cv–
66, 2010 WL 276119 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 15, 2010)
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
Continued
25JNR1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
35928
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 122 / Wednesday, June 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Thus, claimants who appear at the
hearing by video teleconferencing
receive due process, regardless of the
wait time for an in-person hearing or the
use of video teleconferencing
equipment.
Comment: Two commenters
recommended that the first option
should be to schedule in person
hearings. If the claimant cannot attend
the scheduled hearing, then the
commenters suggested that, rather than
opting out, the claimant should be able
to request to appear via telephone or
video teleconferencing. One commenter
noted this was a concern for claimants
who are homeless.
Response: As discussed above, under
these final rules claimants will continue
to have the right to appear in person at
a scheduled hearing if they timely object
to appearing via video teleconferencing,
unless an exception exists. Since our
agency began using the video
teleconferencing process for hearings,
claimants have been required to opt out
of appearing at a hearing via video
teleconferencing, and this process has
operated efficiently for us over the last
10 years. Requiring claimants to opt into
appearing at a hearing via video
teleconferencing could potentially delay
scheduled hearings, create additional
staff work, and cost us valuable
resources. This would likely result in
diminished overall public service,
especially to claimants who have
critical cases, including homeless
claimants. Furthermore, we anticipate
holding a small number of hearings via
telephone because our final rules
provide that we will schedule a
claimant to appear via telephone only
when the claimant’s appearance in
person is not possible, or if the ALJ
determines that extraordinary
circumstances prevent the claimant or
another party from appearing at the
hearing in person or by video
teleconferencing. Therefore, these final
rules continue to give the claimant the
option to appear in person, except in
limited circumstances, while balancing
our needs for administrative efficiency.
Comment: Several commenters raised
a concern about the limited exception to
the right to decline a hearing by video
teleconferencing. Under the proposed
rules, we retained the right to schedule
claimants to appear at the hearing via
video teleconferencing if they change
residence while the case is pending,
even if they have timely objected to
appearing by video teleconferencing.
The commenters noted that many
claimants have legitimate reasons to
(Order adopting and attaching Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:16 Jun 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
move, often involving financial
hardships, and the reason a claimant
requests an in-person hearing does not
change when they move.
Response: We agree that most
claimants have legitimate reasons for
changing residences; however, as noted
in the preamble of the NPRM (78 FR at
38611), and reiterated in this final rule,
we are concerned that some claimants
or their appointed representatives may
be misusing our procedures regarding a
change in residence to undermine the
random assignment of cases to our ALJs.
We are aware of situations in which a
representative instructed claimants to
report a change of address, which was
not a change of residence, so that cases
would be reassigned to a different
hearing office with higher allowance
rates. As a result of such practices, we
must have a means to ensure the
integrity of our program.
We anticipate that we will apply this
exception infrequently. For example,
one of the commenters expressed
concern that we should not apply the
exception if a claimant moves within
the same servicing area after an inperson hearing is scheduled. These final
rules give us discretion to address this
concern. Since the claimant would not
be trying to gain an advantage by
changing residence address, and the
same hearing office would process the
case, we would not expect the ALJ
assigned to the case to apply the
exception. In another example, if a
claimant changes residences to a
different servicing area, there is no
additional delay to schedule the
claimant to appear in person at the
hearing, and we have no indication that
the claimant is attempting to manipulate
the assignment of the case to another
ALJ, then we would use our discretion
to schedule the hearing in person, in
accordance with the claimant’s initial
objection. Therefore, we have not
deleted the exception we proposed, as
some of the commenters requested.
Under these final rules, we continue to
include a limited exception that would
allow us to schedule claimants to
appear at the hearing via video
teleconferencing if they change
residence while the case is pending,
even if they have timely objected to
appearing by video teleconferencing.
Comment: One commenter indicated
that the proposed regulations allowing a
claimant to opt out of a hearing held by
video teleconferencing within 30 days
of a notice, in most instances, should be
more aggressive. The commenter
suggested that claimants should not
have the right to object to appearing at
hearings via video teleconferencing.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Response: We disagree with this
comment. As explained above, we have
allowed claimants to request an inperson hearing since we began the video
teleconferencing program in 2003. The
commenter’s suggestion to eliminate
any possibility for opting out of
appearing at a hearing via video
teleconferencing would not be
consistent with our prior practice or,
even further, allow us to accommodate
an in-person hearing when it would
result in more timely and efficient case
adjudication. Therefore, we have
determined that we will continue to
allow claimants to opt out of appearing
at a hearing via video teleconferencing
if they timely object to appearing by
video teleconferencing. The change we
are making in these rules allows us to
balance claimants’ needs for adequate
time to make an informed decision
about how to appear at hearing with our
needs for program integrity and
administrative efficiency.
Comment: Another commenter
suggested that appointed representatives
should be able to appear via telephone
or video teleconferencing and in a
different location than the claimants
they represent. The commenter also
indicated that representatives should be
allowed to have video teleconferencing
equipment in their offices.
Response: We do not need to revise
these rules in response to the
commenter’s suggestion because we
already have in place a mechanism
similar to what the commenter
requested. In 2008, we developed and
began using an agency initiative, the
Representative Video Project (RVP) that
authorizes representatives to use their
own video teleconferencing equipment
for video hearings under certain
circumstances. The RVP provides
efficient and cost effective methods for
conducting hearings. Under the RVP
initiative, the claimant and his or her
representative must both appear from
the same representative-owned video
teleconferencing site except in instances
where the ALJ determines that it is in
the best interest of the claimant to
permit the claimant and his or her
appointed representative to appear from
separate locations.
Comment: One commenter
recommended a handout guide of the
agency’s business process when
claimants opt out of appearing at a
hearing via video teleconferencing. A
sample guide was included with the
comment. The commenter agreed with
the proposed regulations regarding the
time period to object to a hearing by
video teleconferencing and suggested
business process revisions to implement
the final rules.
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 122 / Wednesday, June 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Response: We considered the
comment and the work the commenter
put into creating the guide. Once these
final rules are published, we will update
our sub-regulatory authority and
business processes to be consistent with
the rules, and we will consider whether
any other resource for the public may be
necessary.
Comment: One commenter questioned
whether the specific hearing office
would be listed on the notice sent to
claimants indicating that they have 30
days to object to a hearing held via
video teleconferencing. The commenter,
who was a representative, indicated
concern about practicing before
unfamiliar hearing offices.
Response: We considered this
concern, and we may or may not
include specific hearing office addresses
on notices to claimants about their right
to request an in-person hearing within
the required time period. Regardless of
whether hearing office addresses are
included, we operate a nationwide
program at the hearing level, and all
hearing offices follow the same
regulations, policies, and procedures.6
Therefore, representatives can
effectively represent claimants at any
hearing office. We note that ALJs have
some limited variances in how they
manage their cases, including requesting
pre-hearing briefs. Under this process,
we will continue to provide
representatives with prior notice of the
name of the ALJ assigned to a hearing
and will continue to provide in advance
any specific instructions from the ALJ
that may affect how a representative
prepares his or her case. We note that
this same potential for minor variances
among ALJs currently exists in
individual hearing offices. Thus, the
final rules do not significantly affect
how a representative practices before us.
Comment: Multiple commenters
raised the concern that there was no
‘‘good cause’’ exception for extending
the 30-day time period to object to
appearing at the hearing via video
teleconferencing or to object to the time
and place of the hearing.
Response: We agree with these
commenters. There may be legitimate
instances when a claimant may not be
able to object to appearing at a hearing
via video teleconferencing or to the time
or place of hearing within the stated
time period, including, but not limited
to, serious illness or death in the family.
Consistent with our other regulations
that provide a good cause exception to
filing deadlines, we revised the final
6 We note that regulations that apply only in the
Boston Region allow for some variances in hearing
office practices. 20 CFR 405.1 through 405.901.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:16 Jun 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
rules to allow the ALJ to determine
whether the claimant had good cause to
file an objection outside the time period
specified to object to appearing at a
hearing via video teleconferencing or to
the time and place of a hearing. The
final rules state that ALJs will use the
standard for good cause set forth in our
current regulations at 20 CFR 404.911,
405.20, and 416.1411 to evaluate these
late filings.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the proposed regulation allowing
for a 5-day time period for objecting to
the time and place of the hearing was
too short. The commenter suggested the
period should be longer.
Response: We considered this
comment, but we disagree with it. The
final rules provide that claimants must
notify us in writing that they object to
the time and place of the hearing at the
earliest possible opportunity, but not
later than 5 days before the date set for
the hearing or 30 days after receiving
notice of the hearing, whichever is
earlier. In fiscal year 2012, we averaged
scheduling hearings nationwide at least
60 days in advance. With this advance
scheduling, most claimants will be
required to object 30 days after receiving
notice of the hearing, which allows us
sufficient time to reschedule the
hearing. In the limited circumstances
where we schedule claimants’ hearing
between 20 to 35 days prior to the
hearing, we need to allow claimants
adequate time to consider whether they
will object to the time and place of the
hearing that may cause the hearing to be
rescheduled at a later time. The final
rules address both scenarios and give
claimants adequate time to decide if
they are going to object to the time and
place of their hearing.
Comment: Several commenters
recommended that we should retain
living closer to another hearing site as
a reason for to find good cause to change
the time and place of a hearing. The
commenters noted that it might be more
difficult for a claimant to travel to
another office that is further away from
his or her residence.
Response: We disagree with the
concerns raised in these comments. As
noted previously, we are concerned that
claimants or their appointed
representatives may be misusing our
procedures regarding a change in
residence to undermine the random
assignment of cases to our ALJs. We
need to protect the integrity of our
program and ensure that ALJs only
reschedule a hearing for good cause. It
may be appropriate, in some instances,
for ALJs to determine that good cause
exists to change the time and place of
a hearing based on the claimant’s
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
35929
residence. However, removing this
reason makes the final rules more
consistent and protects the integrity of
our programs.
Comment: Multiple commenters
noted that more limits were necessary
on the use of telephone hearings.
Specifically, commenters recommended
that claimants should be able to object
to appearing by telephone. They raised
concerns about claimants or
representatives who have hearing
impairments and whether we will make
reasonable accommodations in these
situations.
Response: We considered these
concerns. However, the final rules make
clear that an ALJ will direct a claimant’s
appearance by telephone under two
limited circumstances. First, an ALJ will
direct a claimant to appear by telephone
when the claimant’s appearance in
person is not possible, such as if the
claimant is incarcerated, the facility will
not allow a hearing to be held at the
facility, and video teleconferencing is
not available. Second, an ALJ will direct
a claimant to appear by telephone if the
ALJ determines, either on his or her
own initiative, or at the request of the
claimant or another party, that
extraordinary circumstances prevent the
claimant from appearing in person or by
video teleconferencing.
Since an ALJ will direct a claimant’s
appearance by telephone only under
certain limited circumstances, we do
not believe it is necessary or appropriate
to provide the claimant with an
opportunity to object to the mode of this
appearance. However, we will use this
provision on a limited basis, and its goal
is to promote efficiency of hearings. We
believe the policy is consistent with our
goal of making the hearing process more
efficient for claimants because
appearing by telephone will allow
claimants to have their hearings before
an ALJ in the shortest possible time
period.
Claimants who are scheduled to
appear by telephone will receive the
same due process rights currently
available to all claimants. This includes
the right to object to the time or place
of hearing under 20 CFR 404.936(d),
405.317, and 416.1436(d), which have
been revised accordingly. Regardless of
the mode of appearance, we will also
continue to make reasonable
accommodations for all claimants and
representatives. Therefore, we will
adequately protect a claimants’ rights
without placing additional limitations
on our ability to schedule a claimant’s
appearance at a hearing by telephone.
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
35930
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 122 / Wednesday, June 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Executive Order 12866 as
Supplemented by Executive Order
13563
We consulted with the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and
determined that these final rules meet
the requirements for a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866 as supplemented by Executive
Regulation section
404.936(c)(1);
405.317(a)(1);
416.1436(d)(1).
404.963(c)(2);
405.317(a)(2);
416.1436(d)(2).
405.317(c) ......................
404.936(d); 405.317(a);
416.1436(d).
404.936(e); 405.317(b);
416.1436(e).
404.936(e)(1);
405.317(b)(1);
416.1436(e)(1).
404.938(a); 405.316(a);
416.1438(a).
Total ........................
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Regulatory Flexibility Act
We certify that these final rules will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
because they only affect individuals.
Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility
analysis as provided in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, as amended, is not
required.
Number of
respondents
(annually)
Description of public reporting requirement
For us to consider your change in residence,
you must submit evidence verifying your new
residence.
If you notify us more than 30 days after the date
you receive our notice that you object to appearing by video teleconference, we will extend the time period if you show good cause
for missing the deadline.
If you believe the issues contained in the notice
are incorrect, you should notify the ALJ no
later than 5 days before the date of the hearing; you must state the reason(s) for objection.
If you object to video teleconferencing you must
notify us in writing within 30 days after you receive the notice.
You must notify us if you wish to object to the
time and place in writing no later than 5 days
prior to hearing or 30 days after receiving notice of hearing; you must state the reason(s)
for objection and state the time and place you
want the hearing held.
If you notify us less than 5 days prior to hearing,
or more than 30 days after receiving notice of
hearing, we will extend the time period if you
show good cause for missing the deadline.
Indication in writing that respondent does not
wish to receive notice of hearing.
..............................................................................
SSA submitted an Information
Collection Request for clearance to
OMB. We are soliciting comments on
the burden estimate; the need for the
information; its practical utility; ways to
enhance its quality, utility, and clarity;
and ways to minimize the burden on
respondents, including the use of
automated techniques or other forms of
information technology. If you would
like to submit comments, please send
them to the following locations:
Office of Management and Budget, Attn:
Desk Officer for SSA, Fax Number:
202–395–6974, Email address: OIRA_
Submission@omb.eop.gov.
Social Security Administration, OLCA,
Attn: Reports Clearance Director, 3100
West High Rise, 6401 Security Blvd.,
Baltimore, MD 21235, Fax: 410–966–
2830, Email address:
OR.Reports.Clearance@ssa.gov.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:16 Jun 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
Paperwork Reduction Act
Order 13563. Thus, OMB reviewed
these final rules.
Regulatory Procedures
3,750
13,500
1
10
2,250
45,000
1
5
3,750
850,000
1
5
70,833
900,000
1
30
450,000
5,000
1
5
417
4,000
1
2
133
1,862,500
........................
........................
531,133
20 CFR Part 404
Administrative practice and
procedure, Blind, Disability benefits,
Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability
Insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Social Security.
Sfmt 4700
Estimated
annual burden
5
List of Subjects
Fmt 4700
Average
burden per
response
(minutes)
1
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Nos. 96.001, Social Security—
Disability Insurance; 96.002, Social
Security—Retirement Insurance; 96.004,
Social Security—Survivors Insurance; and
96.006, Supplemental Security Income)
Frm 00020
Frequency of
response
45,000
You can submit comments until July
25, 2014, which is 30 days after the
publication of this rule. To receive a
copy of the OMB clearance package,
contact the SSA Reports Clearance
Officer using any of the above contact
methods. We prefer to receive
comments by email or fax.
PO 00000
These final rules contain public
reporting requirements in the regulation
sections listed below. We are seeking
approval for these regulation sections
and for a new SSA form, which we will
use to collect the information required
by these sections. Below we provide
burden estimates for the public
reporting requirements.
20 CFR Part 405
Administrative practice and
procedure, Blind, Disability benefits,
Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability
Insurance, Public assistance programs,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Social Security,
Supplemental Security Income (SSI).
20 CFR Part 416
Administrative practice and
procedure, Aged, Blind, Disability
benefits, Public assistance programs,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Supplemental Security
Income (SSI).
Dated: April 10, 2014.
Carolyn W. Colvin,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, we are amending 20 CFR
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 122 / Wednesday, June 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
chapter III, parts 404, 405, and 416, as
set forth below:
PART 404—FEDERAL OLD-AGE,
SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY
INSURANCE (1950– )
Subpart J—Determinations,
Administrative Review Process, and
Reopening of Determinations and
Decisions
1. The authority citation for subpart J
of part 404 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 201(j), 204(f), 205(a)–(b),
(d)–(h), and (j), 221, 223(i), 225, and 702(a)(5)
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401(j),
404(f), 405(a)–(b), (d)–(h), and (j), 421, 423(i),
425, and 902(a)(5)); sec. 5, Pub. L. 97–455, 96
Stat. 2500 (42 U.S.C. 405 note); secs. 5, 6(c)–
(e), and 15, Pub. L. 98–460, 98 Stat. 1802 (42
U.S.C. 421 note); sec. 202, Pub. L. 108–203,
118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note).
■
2. Revise § 404.929 to read as follows:
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 404.929 Hearing before an administrative
law judge-general.
If you are dissatisfied with one of the
determinations or decisions listed in
§ 404.930, you may request a hearing.
The Deputy Commissioner for Disability
Adjudication and Review, or his or her
delegate, will appoint an administrative
law judge to conduct the hearing. If
circumstances warrant, the Deputy
Commissioner, or his or her delegate,
may assign your case to another
administrative law judge. At the
hearing, you may appear in person, by
video teleconferencing, or, under certain
extraordinary circumstances, by
telephone. You may submit new
evidence, examine the evidence used in
making the determination or decision
under review, and present and question
witnesses. The administrative law judge
who conducts the hearing may ask you
questions. He or she will issue a
decision based on the preponderance of
the evidence in the hearing record. If
you waive your right to appear at the
hearing, in person, by video
teleconferencing, or by telephone, the
administrative law judge will make a
decision based on the preponderance of
the evidence that is in the file and any
new evidence that may have been
submitted for consideration.
■ 3. In § 404.936, revise paragraphs (b)
and (c)(1), redesignate paragraphs (d)
through (h) as paragraphs (e) through (i),
add a new paragraph (d), and revise
redesignated paragraphs (e) and (f), to
read as follows:
§ 404.936 Time and place for a hearing
before an administrative law judge.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Where we hold hearings. We hold
hearings in the 50 States, the District of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:16 Jun 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the
Northern Mariana Islands, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the
United States Virgin Islands. The
‘‘place’’ of the hearing is the hearing
office or other site(s) at which you and
any other parties to the hearing are
located when you make your
appearance(s) before the administrative
law judge, whether in person, by video
teleconferencing, or by telephone.
(c) * * *
(1) We will consult with the
administrative law judge to determine
the status of case preparation and to
determine whether your appearance, or
the appearance of any other party to the
hearing, will be made in person, by
video teleconferencing or, under
extraordinary circumstances, by
telephone. The administrative law judge
will determine that your appearance, or
the appearance of any other party to the
hearing, be conducted by video
teleconferencing if video
teleconferencing equipment is available
to conduct the appearance, use of video
teleconferencing to conduct the
appearance would be more efficient
than conducting the appearance in
person, and the administrative law
judge determines that there is no
circumstance in the particular case that
prevents the use of video
teleconferencing to conduct the
appearance. The administrative law
judge will direct you or another party to
the hearing to appear by telephone
when:
(i) An appearance in person is not
possible, such as if you are incarcerated,
the facility will not allow a hearing to
be held at the facility, and video
teleconferencing is not available; or
(ii) The administrative law judge
determines, either on his or her own, or
at your request or at the request of any
other party to the hearing, that
extraordinary circumstances prevent
you or another party to the hearing from
appearing at the hearing in person or by
video teleconferencing.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Objecting to appearing by video
teleconferencing. Prior to scheduling
your hearing, we will notify you that we
may schedule you to appear by video
teleconferencing. If you object to
appearing by video teleconferencing,
you must notify us in writing within 30
days after the date you receive the
notice. If you notify us within that time
period and your residence does not
change while your request for hearing is
pending, we will set your hearing for a
time and place at which you may make
your appearance before the
administrative law judge in person.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
35931
(1) Notwithstanding any objections
you may have to appearing by video
teleconferencing, if you change your
residence while your request for hearing
is pending, we may determine how you
will appear, including by video
teleconferencing, as provided in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section. For us
to consider your change of residence
when we schedule your hearing, you
must submit evidence verifying your
new residence.
(2) If you notify us that you object to
appearing by video teleconferencing
more than 30 days after the date you
receive our notice, we will extend the
time period if you show you had good
cause for missing the deadline. To
determine whether good cause exists for
extending the deadline, we use the
standards explained in § 404.911.
(e) Objecting to the time or place of
the hearing. If you object to the time or
place of the hearing, you must:
(1) Notify us in writing at the earliest
possible opportunity, but not later than
5 days before the date set for the hearing
or 30 days after receiving notice of the
hearing, whichever is earlier (or within
the extended time period if we extend
the time as provided in paragraph (e)(3)
of this section); and
(2) State the reason(s) for your
objection and state the time and place
you want the hearing to be held. We
will change the time or place of the
hearing if the administrative law judge
finds you have good cause, as
determined under paragraph (f) of this
section. Section 404.938 provides
procedures we will follow when you do
not respond to a notice of hearing.
(3) If you notify us that you object to
the time or place of hearing less than 5
days before the date set for the hearing
or, if earlier, more than 30 days after
receiving notice of the hearing, we will
extend the time period if you show you
had good cause for missing the
deadline. To determine whether good
cause exists for extending the deadline,
we use the standards explained in
§ 404.911.
(f) Good cause for changing the time
or place. The administrative law judge
will determine whether good cause
exists for changing the time or place of
your scheduled hearing. However, a
finding that good cause exists to
reschedule the time or place of your
hearing will not change the assignment
of the administrative law judge for your
case, unless we determine reassignment
will promote more efficient
administration of the hearing process.
(1) We will reschedule your hearing,
if your reason is one of the following
circumstances and is supported by the
evidence:
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
35932
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 122 / Wednesday, June 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
(i) A serious physical or mental
condition or incapacitating injury makes
it impossible for you or your
representative to travel to the hearing, or
a death in the family occurs; or
(ii) Severe weather conditions make it
impossible for you or your
representative to travel to the hearing.
(2) In determining whether good
cause exists in circumstances other than
those set out in paragraph (f)(1) of this
section, the administrative law judge
will consider your reason(s) for
requesting the change, the facts
supporting it, and the impact of the
proposed change on the efficient
administration of the hearing process.
Factors affecting the impact of the
change include, but are not limited to,
the effect on the processing of other
scheduled hearings, delays that might
occur in rescheduling your hearing, and
whether we previously granted you any
changes in the time or place of your
hearing. Examples of such other
circumstances that you might give for
requesting a change in the time or place
of the hearing include, but are not
limited to, the following:
(i) You unsuccessfully attempted to
obtain a representative and need
additional time to secure representation;
(ii) Your representative was appointed
within 30 days of the scheduled hearing
and needs additional time to prepare for
the hearing;
(iii) Your representative has a prior
commitment to be in court or at another
administrative hearing on the date
scheduled for the hearing;
(iv) A witness who will testify to facts
material to your case would be
unavailable to attend the scheduled
hearing and the evidence cannot be
otherwise obtained;
(v) Transportation is not readily
available for you to travel to the hearing;
or
(vi) You are unrepresented, and you
are unable to respond to the notice of
hearing because of any physical, mental,
educational, or linguistic limitations
(including any lack of facility with the
English language) which you may have.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. In § 404.938, revise paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
§ 404.938 Notice of a hearing before an
administrative law judge.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Notice information. The notice of
hearing will contain a statement of the
specific issues to be decided and tell
you that you may designate a person to
represent you during the proceedings.
The notice will also contain an
explanation of the procedures for
requesting a change in the time or place
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:16 Jun 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
of your hearing, a reminder that if you
fail to appear at your scheduled hearing
without good cause the administrative
law judge may dismiss your hearing
request, and other information about the
scheduling and conduct of your hearing.
You will also be told if your appearance
or that of any other party or witness is
scheduled to be made in person, by
video teleconferencing, or by telephone.
If we have scheduled you to appear at
the hearing by video teleconferencing,
the notice of hearing will tell you that
the scheduled place for the hearing is a
video teleconferencing site and explain
what it means to appear at your hearing
by video teleconferencing.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 405—ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
PROCESS FOR ADJUDICATING
INITIAL DISABILITY CLAIMS
5. The authority citation for part 405
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 201(j), 205(a)–(b), (d)–(h),
and (s), 221, 223(a)–(b), 702(a)(5), 1601, 1602,
1631, and 1633 of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 401(j), 405(a)–(b), (d)–(h), and (s), 421,
423(a)–(b), 902(a)(5), 1381, 1381a, 1383, and
1383(b).
6. In § 405.315, revise paragraphs (a),
(b), and (c)(1), and add new paragraphs
(d) and (e), to read as follows:
■
§ 405.315 Time and place for a hearing
before an administrative law judge.
(a) General. We may set the time and
place for the hearing. We may change
the time and place, if it is necessary. If
we change the time and place of the
hearing, we will send you reasonable
notice of the change. We will notify you
of the time and place of the hearing at
least 75 days before the date of the
hearing, unless you agree to a shorter
notice period.
(b) Where we hold hearings. We hold
hearings in the 50 States, the District of
Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the
Northern Mariana Islands, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the
United States Virgin Islands. The
‘‘place’’ of the hearing is the hearing
office or other site(s) at which you and
any other parties to the hearing are
located when you make your
appearance(s) before the administrative
law judge, whether in person, by video
teleconferencing, or by telephone.
(c) * * *
(1) We will consult with the
administrative law judge to determine
the status of case preparation and to
determine whether your appearance, or
the appearance of any other party to the
hearing, will be made in person or by
video teleconferencing or, under
extraordinary circumstances, by
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
telephone. The administrative law judge
will determine that your appearance, or
the appearance of any other party to the
hearing, be conducted by video
teleconferencing if video
teleconferencing equipment is available
to conduct the appearance, use of video
teleconferencing to conduct the
appearance would be more efficient
than conducting the appearance in
person, and the administrative law
judge determines that there is no
circumstance in the particular case that
prevents the use of video
teleconferencing to conduct the
appearance. The administrative law
judge will direct you to appear by
telephone when:
(i) An appearance in person is not
possible, such as if you are incarcerated,
the facility will not allow a hearing to
be held at the facility, and video
teleconferencing is not available; or
(ii) The administrative law judge
determines, either on his or her own, or
at your request or at the request of any
other party to the hearing, that
extraordinary circumstances prevent
you or another party to the hearing from
appearing at the hearing in person or by
video teleconferencing.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Consultation procedures. Before
we exercise the authority to set the time
and place for an administrative law
judge’s hearings, we will consult with
the appropriate hearing office chief
administrative law judge to determine if
there are any reasons why we should
not set the time and place of the
administrative law judge’s hearings. If
the hearing office chief administrative
law judge does not state a reason that
we believe justifies the limited number
of hearings scheduled by the
administrative law judge, we will then
consult with the administrative law
judge before deciding whether to begin
to exercise our authority to set the time
and place for the administrative law
judge’s hearings. If the hearing office
chief administrative law judge states a
reason that we believe justifies the
limited number of hearings scheduled
by the administrative law judge, we will
not exercise our authority to set the time
and place for the administrative law
judge’s hearings. We will work with the
hearing office chief administrative law
judge to identify those circumstances
where we can assist the administrative
law judge and address any impediment
that may affect the scheduling of
hearings.
(e) Pilot program. The provisions in
the first three sentences of paragraph (a),
the first sentence of paragraph (c)(1),
and paragraph (d) of this section are a
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 122 / Wednesday, June 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
pilot program. These provisions will no
longer be effective on August 9, 2014,
unless we terminate them earlier or
extend them beyond that date by notice
of a final rule in the Federal Register.
■ 7. In § 405.316, revise paragraphs (a)
and (b)(5), to read as follows:
§ 405.316 Notice of a hearing before an
administrative law judge.
(a) Issuing the notice. After we set the
time and place of the hearing, we will
mail notice of the hearing to you at your
last known address, or give the notice to
you by personal service, unless you
have indicated in writing that you do
not wish to receive this notice. We will
mail or serve the notice at least 75 days
before the date of the hearing, unless
you agree to a shorter notice period.
(b) * * *
(5) Whether your appearance or that
of any witness is scheduled to be made
in person, by video teleconferencing, or
by telephone. If we have scheduled you
to appear at the hearing by video
teleconferencing, the notice of hearing
will tell you that the scheduled place for
the hearing is a video teleconferencing
site and explain what it means to appear
at your hearing by video
teleconferencing.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 8. Revise § 405.317 to read as follows:
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 405.317
Objections.
(a) Objecting to appearing by video
teleconferencing. Prior to scheduling
your hearing, we will notify you that we
may schedule you to appear by video
teleconferencing. If you object to
appearing by video teleconferencing,
you must notify us in writing within 30
days after the date you receive the
notice. If you notify us within that time
period and your residence does not
change while your request for hearing is
pending, we will set your hearing for a
time and place at which you may make
your appearance before the
administrative law judge in person.
(1) Notwithstanding any objections
you may have to appearing by video
teleconferencing, if you change your
residence while your request for hearing
is pending, we may determine how you
will appear, including by video
teleconferencing, as provided in
§ 405.315(c). For us to consider your
change of residence when we schedule
your hearing, you must submit evidence
verifying your new residence.
(2) If you notify us that you object to
appearing by video teleconferencing
more than 30 days after the date you
receive our notice, we will extend the
time period if you show you had good
cause for missing the deadline. To
determine whether good cause exists for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:16 Jun 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
extending the deadline, we use the
standards explained in § 405.20.
(b) Objecting to the time and place of
the hearing. If you object to the time or
place of your hearing, you must:
(1) Notify us in writing at the earliest
possible opportunity before the date set
for the hearing, but not later than 30
days after receiving notice of the
hearing. If you notify us that you object
to the time or place of hearing more
than 30 days after receiving notice of the
hearing, we will extend the time period
if you show you had good cause for
missing the deadline. To determine
whether good cause exists for extending
the deadline, we use the standards
explained in § 405.20; and
(2) State the reason(s) for your
objection and state the time and place
you want the hearing to be held. The
administrative law judge will consider
your reason(s) for requesting the change,
the facts supporting it, and the impact
of the proposed change on the efficient
administration of the hearing process.
Factors affecting the impact of the
change include, but are not limited to,
the effect on the processing of other
scheduled hearings, delays that might
occur in rescheduling your hearing, and
whether we previously granted you any
changes in the time or place of your
hearing. However, an objection to the
time or place of your hearing will not
change the assignment of the
administrative law judge for your case,
unless we determine reassignment will
promote more efficient administration
of the hearing process.
(c) Issues. If you believe that the
issues contained in the hearing notice
are incorrect, you should notify the
administrative law judge in writing at
the earliest possible opportunity, but
you must notify him or her no later than
5 business days before the date set for
the hearing. You must state the reason(s)
for your objection. The administrative
law judge will make a decision on your
objection either at the hearing or in
writing before the hearing.
9. In § 405.350, revise the first
sentence of paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
■
§ 405.350 Presenting evidence at a hearing
before an administrative law judge.
(a) * * * You have a right to appear
before the administrative law judge,
either in person or, when the
administrative law judge determines
that the conditions in § 405.315(c) exist,
by video teleconferencing or telephone,
to present evidence and to state your
position. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
35933
PART 416—SUPPLEMENTAL
SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED,
BLIND, AND DISABLED
Subpart N—Determinations,
Administrative Review Process, and
Reopening of Determinations and
Decisions
10. The authority citation for subpart
N of part 416 continues to read as
follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 702(a)(5), 1631, and 1633
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
902(a)(5), 1383, and 1383b); sec. 202, Pub. L.
108–203, 118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note).
11. Revise § 416.1429 to read as
follows:
■
§ 416.1429 Hearing before an
administrative law judge-general.
If you are dissatisfied with one of the
determinations or decisions listed in
§ 416.1430, you may request a hearing.
The Deputy Commissioner for Disability
Adjudication and Review, or his or her
delegate, will appoint an administrative
law judge to conduct the hearing. If
circumstances warrant, the Deputy
Commissioner, or his or her delegate,
may assign your case to another
administrative law judge. At the
hearing, you may appear in person, by
video teleconferencing, or, under certain
extraordinary circumstances, by
telephone. You may submit new
evidence, examine the evidence used in
making the determination or decision
under review, and present and question
witnesses. The administrative law judge
who conducts the hearing may ask you
questions. He or she will issue a
decision based on the preponderance of
the evidence in the hearing record. If
you waive your right to appear at the
hearing, in person, by video
teleconferencing, or by telephone, the
administrative law judge will make a
decision based on the preponderance of
the evidence that is in the file and any
new evidence that may have been
submitted for consideration.
■ 12. In § 416.1436, revise paragraphs
(b) and (c)(1), redesignate paragraphs (d)
through (h) as paragraphs (e) through (i),
add a new paragraph (d), and revise
redesignated paragraphs (e) and (f), to
read as follows:
§ 416.1436 Time and place for a hearing
before an administrative law judge.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Where we hold hearings. We hold
hearings in the 50 States, the District of
Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the
Northern Mariana Islands, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the
United States Virgin Islands. The
‘‘place’’ of the hearing is the hearing
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
35934
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 122 / Wednesday, June 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
office or other site(s) at which you and
any other parties to the hearing are
located when you make your
appearance(s) before the administrative
law judge, whether in person, by video
teleconferencing, or by telephone.
(c) * * *
(1) We will consult with the
administrative law judge to determine
the status of case preparation and to
determine whether your appearance, or
the appearance of any other party to the
hearing, will be made in person, by
video teleconferencing or, under
extraordinary circumstances, by
telephone. The administrative law judge
will determine that your appearance, or
the appearance of any other party to the
hearing, be conducted by video
teleconferencing if video
teleconferencing equipment is available
to conduct the appearance, use of video
teleconferencing to conduct the
appearance would be more efficient
than conducting the appearance in
person, and the administrative law
judge determines there is no
circumstance in the particular case that
prevents the use of video
teleconferencing to conduct the
appearance. The administrative law
judge will direct you or another party to
the hearing to appear by telephone
when:
(i) An appearance in person is not
possible, such as if you are incarcerated,
the facility will not allow a hearing to
be held at the facility, and video
teleconferencing is not available; or
(ii) The administrative law judge
determines, either on his or her own, or
at your request or at the request of any
other party to the hearing, that
extraordinary circumstances prevent
you or another party to the hearing from
appearing at the hearing in person or by
video teleconferencing.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Objecting to appearing by video
teleconferencing. Prior to scheduling
your hearing, we will notify you that we
may schedule you to appear by video
teleconferencing. If you object to
appearing by video teleconferencing,
you must notify us in writing within 30
days after the date you receive the
notice. If you notify us within that time
period and your residence does not
change while your request for hearing is
pending, we will set your hearing for a
time and place at which you may make
your appearance before the
administrative law judge in person.
(1) Notwithstanding any objections
you may have to appearing by video
teleconferencing, if you change your
residence while your request for hearing
is pending, we may determine how you
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:16 Jun 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
will appear, including by video
teleconferencing, as provided in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section. For us
to consider your change of residence
when we schedule your hearing, you
must submit evidence verifying your
new residence.
(2) If you notify us that you object to
appearing by video teleconferencing
more than 30 days after the date you
receive our notice, we will extend the
time period if you show you had good
cause for missing the deadline. To
determine whether good cause exists for
extending the deadline, we use the
standards explained in § 416.1411.
(e) Objecting to the time or place of
the hearing. If you object to the time or
place of your hearing, you must:
(1) Notify us in writing at the earliest
possible opportunity, but not later than
5 days before the date set for the hearing
or 30 days after receiving notice of the
hearing, whichever is earlier (or within
the extended time period if we extend
the time as provided in paragraph (e)(3)
of this section); and
(2) State the reason(s) for your
objection and state the time and place
you want the hearing to be held. We
will change the time or place of the
hearing if the administrative law judge
finds you have good cause, as
determined under paragraph (f) of this
section. Section 416.1438 provides
procedures we will follow when you do
not respond to a notice of hearing.
(3) If you notify us that you object to
the time or place of hearing less than 5
days before the date set for the hearing
or, if earlier, more than 30 days after
receiving notice of the hearing, we will
extend the time period if you show you
had good cause for missing the
deadline. To determine whether good
cause exists for extending the deadline,
we use the standards explained in
§ 416.1411.
(f) Good cause for changing the time
or place. The administrative law judge
will determine whether good cause
exists for changing the time or place of
your scheduled hearing. However, a
finding that good cause exists to
reschedule the time or place of your
hearing will not change the assignment
of the administrative law judge for your
case, unless we determine reassignment
will promote more efficient
administration of the hearing process.
(1) We will reschedule your hearing,
if your reason is one of the following
circumstances and is supported by the
evidence:
(i) A serious physical or mental
condition or incapacitating injury makes
it impossible for you or your
representative to travel to the hearing, or
a death in the family occurs; or
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(ii) Severe weather conditions make it
impossible for you or your
representative to travel to the hearing.
(2) In determining whether good
cause exists in circumstances other than
those set out in paragraph (f)(1) of this
section, the administrative law judge
will consider your reason(s) for
requesting the change, the facts
supporting it, and the impact of the
proposed change on the efficient
administration of the hearing process.
Factors affecting the impact of the
change include, but are not limited to,
the effect on the processing of other
scheduled hearings, delays that might
occur in rescheduling your hearing, and
whether we previously granted you any
changes in the time or place of your
hearing. Examples of such other
circumstances that you might give for
requesting a change in the time or place
of the hearing include, but are not
limited to, the following:
(i) You unsuccessfully attempted to
obtain a representative and need
additional time to secure representation;
(ii) Your representative was appointed
within 30 days of the scheduled hearing
and needs additional time to prepare for
the hearing;
(iii) Your representative has a prior
commitment to be in court or at another
administrative hearing on the date
scheduled for the hearing;
(iv) A witness who will testify to facts
material to your case would be
unavailable to attend the scheduled
hearing and the evidence cannot be
otherwise obtained;
(v) Transportation is not readily
available for you to travel to the hearing;
or
(vi) You are unrepresented, and you
are unable to respond to the notice of
hearing because of any physical, mental,
educational, or linguistic limitations
(including any lack of facility with the
English language) which you may have.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 13. In § 416.1438, revise paragraph (b)
to read as follows:
§ 416.1438 Notice of a hearing before an
administrative law judge.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Notice information. The notice of
hearing will contain a statement of the
specific issues to be decided and tell
you that you may designate a person to
represent you during the proceedings.
The notice will also contain an
explanation of the procedures for
requesting a change in the time or place
of your hearing, a reminder that if you
fail to appear at your scheduled hearing
without good cause the administrative
law judge may dismiss your hearing
request, and other information about the
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 122 / Wednesday, June 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
scheduling and conduct of your hearing.
You will also be told if your appearance
or that of any other party or witness is
scheduled to be made in person, by
video teleconferencing, or by telephone.
If we have scheduled you to appear at
the hearing by video teleconferencing,
the notice of hearing will tell you that
the scheduled place for the hearing is a
video teleconferencing site and explain
what it means to appear at your hearing
by video teleconferencing.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2014–14793 Filed 6–24–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 9
[Public Notice 8776]
RIN 1400–AC75
National Security Information
Regulations
Department of State.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of State
revises its regulations governing the
classification of national security
information that is under the control of
the Department in order to reflect the
provisions of a new executive order on
national security information, E.O.
13526 and its implementing directive in
Information Security Oversight Office
regulations. This revision also reflects
consequent changes in the Department’s
procedures since the last revision of the
Department’s regulations on this subject
in 2004. These changes include some
changes in the classification categories,
in the rules governing the sharing of
other-agency classified information, and
in granting access to classified
information to certain former
government personnel. This regulation
does not apply to information classified
as Restricted Data (RD) or Formerly
Restricted Data (FRD). Requirements for
classifying and declassifying RD and
FRD can be found in Department of
Energy regulations on Nuclear
Classification and Declassification, or in
a Department of State regulation or
internal order implementing those
regulations.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
June 25, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alice Kottmyer, Attorney-Adviser,
Department of State (L/M), 2201 C Street
NW., Washington, DC 20520, or at
kottmyeram@state.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
executive order governing classification
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:16 Jun 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
of national security information, E.O.
12958, has been superseded by E.O.
13526, effective December 29, 2009. In
Section 1.4, the new order makes some
minor changes in classification
categories, such as eliminating reference
to transnational terrorism and adding a
qualifier to the term ‘‘weapons of mass
destruction.’’ That section also requires
that the damage to national security be
identifiable and describable. These
changes are reflected in Section 9.4 of
the rule.
While the basis for classification and
the classification levels in E.O. 13526
are basically the same as those in
predecessor orders, the new executive
order contains several provisions not
present in its immediate predecessors,
such as the training of classifiers,
particularly derivative classifiers (not
covered in this rule); and, in Section
4.1(i)(1), the sharing with another
agency, with certain U.S. entities, or
with foreign governments of classified
information that was originated by
another agency after the effective date of
the executive order (covered in Section
9.12 of the rule). Section 4.4 of the new
executive order changes a limitation in
E.O. 12958 on access to classified
information by former government
personnel but adds a limitation that the
positions that they held be senior
government positions. These changes
are included in Section 9.13 of this rule.
This section is among several from 22
CFR Part 171 pertaining to
declassification that have been
transferred to Part 9 and revised.
Regulatory Analysis
Administrative Procedure Act. The
Department of State is publishing this
rulemaking as a final rule. 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) provides that a ‘‘general notice
of proposed rulemaking’’ need not be
published in the Federal Register
‘‘when the agency for good cause finds
(and incorporates the finding and a brief
statement of reasons therefor in the
rules issued) that notice and public
procedure thereon are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.’’ The Department of State finds
good cause to issue this rule without
advance notice and public comment
because it has determined such
procedures are unnecessary. As we note
above, this rulemaking incorporates into
existing Department regulations the
provisions of Executive Order 13526.
The Executive Order is a directive that
must be implemented throughout the
executive branch without significant
modification; otherwise, there could be
significant confusion among the public,
when different agencies adopt different
classification standards. Because of this,
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
35935
the Department determined that
soliciting public comment was
unnecessary.
In addition, this rulemaking involves
matters of internal Department
management and organization;
specifically, the internal procedures for
the classification and handling of
classified national security information;
therefore, the Department has
determined that this rulemaking is
exempt from notice-and-comment
requirements under 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2).
Finally, the Department has determined
that this final rule should be effective
immediately pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3). The Department finds ‘‘good
cause’’ in the need to immediately align
the Department’s national security
regulations with those of the White
House and other agencies, thus
eliminating the confusion that might be
caused by conflicting regulations in
such a sensitive area.
Regulatory Flexibility Act. Since the
Department is not required to publish a
general notice of proposed rulemaking
for this rulemaking, a Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis is not required.
Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995. This
rule will not result in the expenditure
by State, local, and tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or by the private sector,
of $100 million or more in any year and
it will not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments. Therefore, no
actions were deemed necessary under
the provisions of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
Information Quality Act. The
Department intends to disseminate
information under this rulemaking in
compliance with the Information
Quality Act, Public Law 106–554, and
the Department of State Information
Quality Guidelines, dated October 1,
2002, located at https://www.state.gov/
misc/13864.htm.
Congressional Review Act. This rule is
not a major rule as defined by the
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804.
This rule will not result in an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million
or more; a major increase in costs or
prices; or significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
companies to compete with foreign
based companies in domestic and
import markets. The rule is being
submitted to both Houses of Congress
and the Comptroller General. Since it is
not a major rule, the proposed effective
date is the date of publication.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563.
Executive Order 12866 directs agencies
to assess the costs and benefits of
available regulatory alternatives and, if
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 122 (Wednesday, June 25, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35926-35935]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14793]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
20 CFR Parts 404, 405, and 416
[Docket No. 2011-0056]
RIN 0960-AH37
Changes to Scheduling and Appearing at Hearings
AGENCY: Social Security Administration.
ACTION: Final rules.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: These final rules explain how a claimant may object to
appearing at a hearing via video teleconferencing, or to the time and
place of a hearing. These final rules adopt, with further clarification
regarding our good cause exception, the notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) that we published in the Federal Register on June 27, 2013. We
expect that these final rules will have a minimal impact on the public,
help ensure the integrity of our programs, and allow us to administer
our programs more efficiently.
DATES: These final rules are effective July 25, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maren Weight, Social Security
Administration, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3260, (703)
605-7100 for information about this notice. For information on
eligibility or filing for benefits, call our national toll-free number,
1-800-772-1213 or TTY 1-800-325-0778, or visit our Internet site,
Social Security Online, at https://www.socialsecurity.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
We are making final, with further clarification regarding our good
cause exception, the proposed NPRM that we published in the Federal
Register on June 27, 2013.\1\ As we discussed in the preamble to the
NPRM, our workloads at the administrative law judge (ALJ) hearing level
continue to grow, and we are implementing final rules that will help us
provide better service by allowing us to conduct hearings and issue
decisions more expeditiously.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The NPRM is available at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-06-27/pdf/2013-14894.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objecting to Appearing by Video Teleconferencing
As we explained in the NPRM, we have conducted hearings by video
teleconferencing since 2003. Over the last decade, we found that
hearings held by video teleconferencing help reduce our average
processing time, reduce travel expenses, and allow us to better serve
the public. Therefore, we have continued to improve our video
teleconferencing capabilities, added five National Hearing Centers that
hold hearings exclusively by video teleconferencing, and increased the
number of ALJs in traditional hearing offices who hold hearings by
video teleconferencing.
However, we reiterate in these final rules that while we have taken
significant strides in increasing our video teleconferencing capacity,
we remain concerned that some individuals are manipulating our rules in
order to obtain a hearing with an ALJ with a higher allowance rate. As
we previously noted, this may be an unintended consequence of our
commitment to transparency as we make more information, such as an
ALJ's allowance rates, available to claimants and their
representatives. Until the effective date of this final rule, these
types of efforts to undermine the random assignment of ALJs have
generally been successful. Our business process has been to reschedule
a hearing if the claimant, or a representative on a claimant's behalf,
objected to appearing by video teleconferencing at any time before or
at the hearing, or to transfer a case if a claimant indicated he or she
moved closer to another hearing office.
Our continued concerns about efforts to undermine our rules are not
merely anecdotal. At the time of this final rule, we brought and
pursued sanction actions against an appointed representative for
misrepresenting facts in order to have cases transferred to a hearing
office with a higher allowance rate. We have observed some individuals
decline hearings by video teleconferencing after learning that the
claimant is scheduled to appear before an ALJ with a lower allowance
rate. We have observed other questionable conduct that, while not
necessarily constituting misconduct often delays the processing of
cases and prevents the use of video teleconferencing
[[Page 35927]]
technology in certain offices. We continue to receive declinations less
than 20 days \2\ before the date the hearing, resulting in the loss of
the hearing slot that we could have used to hold a hearing for another
claimant. Finally, when we receive a declination for a hearing by video
teleconferencing after the hearing has been scheduled; we must use
additional administrative resources to reschedule a hearing at a time
and place amenable to all hearing participants. For these types of
reasons, a change to our current process was necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Our regulations require that we provide notice of a hearing
20 days in advance. See 20 CFR 404.938 and 416.1438. Late
declinations are even more problematic in the Boston Region where we
are required to give notice 75 days in advance. See 20 CFR 405.316.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this final rule, before we assign an ALJ to the case or before
we schedule a hearing, we will notify a claimant that he or she has the
right to object to appearing at the hearing by video teleconferencing.
If the claimant objects to appearing at the hearing by video
teleconferencing, the claimant must tell us in writing within 30 days
after the date he or she receives the notice, unless he or she shows
good cause for missing the deadline. If we receive a timely objection,
or we find there was good cause for missing the deadline, we will
schedule the claimant for an in person hearing, with one limited
exception. If a claimant moves to a different residence while his or
her request for a hearing is pending, we will determine whether the
claimant will appear in person or by video teleconferencing, even if
the claimant previously objected to appearing by video
teleconferencing. In addition, in order for us to consider a change in
residence when scheduling a hearing, the claimant must submit evidence
verifying a new residence. After we receive evidence regarding the
claimant's new residence, we will decide how the claimant's appearance
will be made. This limited exception to the rule allows us to protect
the integrity of our programs while providing us with the flexibility
to transfer cases when there is a legitimate change in residence and we
can process the case more efficiently.
Time Period for Objecting to a Hearing
In these final rules, we also specified the time period for
objecting to the time and place of a hearing. To ensure that we have
adequate time to prepare for the hearing, we require that a claimant
notify us of an objection in writing at the earliest possible
opportunity, but not later than 5 days before the date set for the
hearing or, if earlier, 30 days after receiving notice of the hearing.
If the claimant objects to the time and place of the hearing outside of
the specified time period and fails to attend the hearing, the ALJ will
follow existing sub-regulatory authority to develop good cause for
failure to appear. We also adopted other minor revisions in the final
rules to clarify when we will reschedule a hearing for good cause. For
instance, we removed the example that a claimant might offer living
closer to another hearing site as a good cause reason to object to the
time and place of the hearing.
Appearing at the Hearing by Telephone
To further reduce the need to reschedule hearings and to improve
our efficiency, we provide that the ALJ may determine that
extraordinary circumstances exist to schedule the claimant, or any
other party to the hearing, to appear at the hearing by telephone. For
example, an ALJ will direct a claimant or other party to the hearing to
appear by telephone when the person's appearance in person is not
possible, such as when the person is incarcerated, the correctional
facility will not allow a hearing to be held at the facility, and video
teleconferencing is not available. The flexibility in the final rule
allows us to continue the practice of scheduling a hearing by telephone
when the claimant specifically requests a hearing in this manner, and
the ALJ determines that extraordinary circumstances prevent the
claimant or other party who makes the request from appearing at the
hearing in person or by video teleconferencing.
As we noted in the NPRM, we spend significant administrative
resources arranging in person hearings with officials of correctional
facilities. It also reduces our productivity when an ALJ travels to a
confinement facility to hold one or two hearings rather than conducting
a full hearing docket. These final rules will save administrative
resources and allow us to provide more timely hearings to all claimants
because the ALJ will be present in the hearing office to conduct a full
hearing docket.
Part 405
In the final rule, we adopted several changes to Part 405 for
consistency with the rules in Parts 404 and 416. We adopted changes
relating to video teleconferencing and hearing appearances by telephone
in extraordinary circumstances, as described above. For consistency
with our pilot program \3\ in all regions except Boston, we also
adopted changes allowing the agency, rather than the ALJ, to set the
time and place for hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See 20 CFR 404.936(a) and (h), and 416.1436(a) and (h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Comments on the NPRM
In the NPRM, we provided a 60-day comment period, which ended on
August 26, 2013. We carefully considered the 13 public comments we
received. Because some of the comments were lengthy, we summarize them
below. We present the commenters' concerns and suggestions and respond
to the significant issues relevant to this rulemaking. We do not
respond to comments, or portions of comments, that are outside the
scope of this rulemaking proceeding.
Comment: One commenter indicated that ALJs will not be able to
adequately see and observe claimants if they were scheduled to appear
via video teleconferencing. Another commenter argued that it is unfair
if claimants have to wait longer for in-person hearings. Both
commenters essentially argued that hearings held by video
teleconferencing violate claimants' due process rights.
Response: We disagree with the concerns raised in these comments.
First, it is important to reiterate that under these final rules
claimants will generally continue to have the right to appear in person
at a scheduled hearing if they timely object to appearing via video
teleconferencing. Furthermore, our regulations have allowed claimants
to appear via video teleconferencing at our hearings since 2003.\4\ In
our experience holding hearings by video teleconference, we have found
that ALJs are able to observe a claimant adequately. As our resources
permit, we continue to improve our video teleconferencing equipment for
hearings, and we manage cases as effectively as possible to provide
claimants hearings in the timeliest method available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 68 FR 5210 and 68 FR 69003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also disagree with the commenters' concerns that a hearing held
by video teleconferencing can adversely affect a claimant's right to
due process. A number of Federal courts have held that hearings
conducted via video teleconferencing adequately protect a claimant's
due process rights.\5\
[[Page 35928]]
Thus, claimants who appear at the hearing by video teleconferencing
receive due process, regardless of the wait time for an in-person
hearing or the use of video teleconferencing equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Lipp v. Astrue, No. 2:09-cv-991, 2010 WL 4719454 at *11
(S.D. Ohio Oct. 5, 2010) (Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation), adopted by district court, 2010 WL 4718763 (S.D.
Ohio November 15, 2010), Evans v. Astrue, No. 4:08-cv-66, 2010 WL
276119 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 15, 2010) (Order adopting and attaching
Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: Two commenters recommended that the first option should be
to schedule in person hearings. If the claimant cannot attend the
scheduled hearing, then the commenters suggested that, rather than
opting out, the claimant should be able to request to appear via
telephone or video teleconferencing. One commenter noted this was a
concern for claimants who are homeless.
Response: As discussed above, under these final rules claimants
will continue to have the right to appear in person at a scheduled
hearing if they timely object to appearing via video teleconferencing,
unless an exception exists. Since our agency began using the video
teleconferencing process for hearings, claimants have been required to
opt out of appearing at a hearing via video teleconferencing, and this
process has operated efficiently for us over the last 10 years.
Requiring claimants to opt into appearing at a hearing via video
teleconferencing could potentially delay scheduled hearings, create
additional staff work, and cost us valuable resources. This would
likely result in diminished overall public service, especially to
claimants who have critical cases, including homeless claimants.
Furthermore, we anticipate holding a small number of hearings via
telephone because our final rules provide that we will schedule a
claimant to appear via telephone only when the claimant's appearance in
person is not possible, or if the ALJ determines that extraordinary
circumstances prevent the claimant or another party from appearing at
the hearing in person or by video teleconferencing. Therefore, these
final rules continue to give the claimant the option to appear in
person, except in limited circumstances, while balancing our needs for
administrative efficiency.
Comment: Several commenters raised a concern about the limited
exception to the right to decline a hearing by video teleconferencing.
Under the proposed rules, we retained the right to schedule claimants
to appear at the hearing via video teleconferencing if they change
residence while the case is pending, even if they have timely objected
to appearing by video teleconferencing. The commenters noted that many
claimants have legitimate reasons to move, often involving financial
hardships, and the reason a claimant requests an in-person hearing does
not change when they move.
Response: We agree that most claimants have legitimate reasons for
changing residences; however, as noted in the preamble of the NPRM (78
FR at 38611), and reiterated in this final rule, we are concerned that
some claimants or their appointed representatives may be misusing our
procedures regarding a change in residence to undermine the random
assignment of cases to our ALJs. We are aware of situations in which a
representative instructed claimants to report a change of address,
which was not a change of residence, so that cases would be reassigned
to a different hearing office with higher allowance rates. As a result
of such practices, we must have a means to ensure the integrity of our
program.
We anticipate that we will apply this exception infrequently. For
example, one of the commenters expressed concern that we should not
apply the exception if a claimant moves within the same servicing area
after an in-person hearing is scheduled. These final rules give us
discretion to address this concern. Since the claimant would not be
trying to gain an advantage by changing residence address, and the same
hearing office would process the case, we would not expect the ALJ
assigned to the case to apply the exception. In another example, if a
claimant changes residences to a different servicing area, there is no
additional delay to schedule the claimant to appear in person at the
hearing, and we have no indication that the claimant is attempting to
manipulate the assignment of the case to another ALJ, then we would use
our discretion to schedule the hearing in person, in accordance with
the claimant's initial objection. Therefore, we have not deleted the
exception we proposed, as some of the commenters requested. Under these
final rules, we continue to include a limited exception that would
allow us to schedule claimants to appear at the hearing via video
teleconferencing if they change residence while the case is pending,
even if they have timely objected to appearing by video
teleconferencing.
Comment: One commenter indicated that the proposed regulations
allowing a claimant to opt out of a hearing held by video
teleconferencing within 30 days of a notice, in most instances, should
be more aggressive. The commenter suggested that claimants should not
have the right to object to appearing at hearings via video
teleconferencing.
Response: We disagree with this comment. As explained above, we
have allowed claimants to request an in-person hearing since we began
the video teleconferencing program in 2003. The commenter's suggestion
to eliminate any possibility for opting out of appearing at a hearing
via video teleconferencing would not be consistent with our prior
practice or, even further, allow us to accommodate an in-person hearing
when it would result in more timely and efficient case adjudication.
Therefore, we have determined that we will continue to allow claimants
to opt out of appearing at a hearing via video teleconferencing if they
timely object to appearing by video teleconferencing. The change we are
making in these rules allows us to balance claimants' needs for
adequate time to make an informed decision about how to appear at
hearing with our needs for program integrity and administrative
efficiency.
Comment: Another commenter suggested that appointed representatives
should be able to appear via telephone or video teleconferencing and in
a different location than the claimants they represent. The commenter
also indicated that representatives should be allowed to have video
teleconferencing equipment in their offices.
Response: We do not need to revise these rules in response to the
commenter's suggestion because we already have in place a mechanism
similar to what the commenter requested. In 2008, we developed and
began using an agency initiative, the Representative Video Project
(RVP) that authorizes representatives to use their own video
teleconferencing equipment for video hearings under certain
circumstances. The RVP provides efficient and cost effective methods
for conducting hearings. Under the RVP initiative, the claimant and his
or her representative must both appear from the same representative-
owned video teleconferencing site except in instances where the ALJ
determines that it is in the best interest of the claimant to permit
the claimant and his or her appointed representative to appear from
separate locations.
Comment: One commenter recommended a handout guide of the agency's
business process when claimants opt out of appearing at a hearing via
video teleconferencing. A sample guide was included with the comment.
The commenter agreed with the proposed regulations regarding the time
period to object to a hearing by video teleconferencing and suggested
business process revisions to implement the final rules.
[[Page 35929]]
Response: We considered the comment and the work the commenter put
into creating the guide. Once these final rules are published, we will
update our sub-regulatory authority and business processes to be
consistent with the rules, and we will consider whether any other
resource for the public may be necessary.
Comment: One commenter questioned whether the specific hearing
office would be listed on the notice sent to claimants indicating that
they have 30 days to object to a hearing held via video
teleconferencing. The commenter, who was a representative, indicated
concern about practicing before unfamiliar hearing offices.
Response: We considered this concern, and we may or may not include
specific hearing office addresses on notices to claimants about their
right to request an in-person hearing within the required time period.
Regardless of whether hearing office addresses are included, we operate
a nationwide program at the hearing level, and all hearing offices
follow the same regulations, policies, and procedures.\6\ Therefore,
representatives can effectively represent claimants at any hearing
office. We note that ALJs have some limited variances in how they
manage their cases, including requesting pre-hearing briefs. Under this
process, we will continue to provide representatives with prior notice
of the name of the ALJ assigned to a hearing and will continue to
provide in advance any specific instructions from the ALJ that may
affect how a representative prepares his or her case. We note that this
same potential for minor variances among ALJs currently exists in
individual hearing offices. Thus, the final rules do not significantly
affect how a representative practices before us.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ We note that regulations that apply only in the Boston
Region allow for some variances in hearing office practices. 20 CFR
405.1 through 405.901.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: Multiple commenters raised the concern that there was no
``good cause'' exception for extending the 30-day time period to object
to appearing at the hearing via video teleconferencing or to object to
the time and place of the hearing.
Response: We agree with these commenters. There may be legitimate
instances when a claimant may not be able to object to appearing at a
hearing via video teleconferencing or to the time or place of hearing
within the stated time period, including, but not limited to, serious
illness or death in the family. Consistent with our other regulations
that provide a good cause exception to filing deadlines, we revised the
final rules to allow the ALJ to determine whether the claimant had good
cause to file an objection outside the time period specified to object
to appearing at a hearing via video teleconferencing or to the time and
place of a hearing. The final rules state that ALJs will use the
standard for good cause set forth in our current regulations at 20 CFR
404.911, 405.20, and 416.1411 to evaluate these late filings.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the proposed regulation
allowing for a 5-day time period for objecting to the time and place of
the hearing was too short. The commenter suggested the period should be
longer.
Response: We considered this comment, but we disagree with it. The
final rules provide that claimants must notify us in writing that they
object to the time and place of the hearing at the earliest possible
opportunity, but not later than 5 days before the date set for the
hearing or 30 days after receiving notice of the hearing, whichever is
earlier. In fiscal year 2012, we averaged scheduling hearings
nationwide at least 60 days in advance. With this advance scheduling,
most claimants will be required to object 30 days after receiving
notice of the hearing, which allows us sufficient time to reschedule
the hearing. In the limited circumstances where we schedule claimants'
hearing between 20 to 35 days prior to the hearing, we need to allow
claimants adequate time to consider whether they will object to the
time and place of the hearing that may cause the hearing to be
rescheduled at a later time. The final rules address both scenarios and
give claimants adequate time to decide if they are going to object to
the time and place of their hearing.
Comment: Several commenters recommended that we should retain
living closer to another hearing site as a reason for to find good
cause to change the time and place of a hearing. The commenters noted
that it might be more difficult for a claimant to travel to another
office that is further away from his or her residence.
Response: We disagree with the concerns raised in these comments.
As noted previously, we are concerned that claimants or their appointed
representatives may be misusing our procedures regarding a change in
residence to undermine the random assignment of cases to our ALJs. We
need to protect the integrity of our program and ensure that ALJs only
reschedule a hearing for good cause. It may be appropriate, in some
instances, for ALJs to determine that good cause exists to change the
time and place of a hearing based on the claimant's residence. However,
removing this reason makes the final rules more consistent and protects
the integrity of our programs.
Comment: Multiple commenters noted that more limits were necessary
on the use of telephone hearings. Specifically, commenters recommended
that claimants should be able to object to appearing by telephone. They
raised concerns about claimants or representatives who have hearing
impairments and whether we will make reasonable accommodations in these
situations.
Response: We considered these concerns. However, the final rules
make clear that an ALJ will direct a claimant's appearance by telephone
under two limited circumstances. First, an ALJ will direct a claimant
to appear by telephone when the claimant's appearance in person is not
possible, such as if the claimant is incarcerated, the facility will
not allow a hearing to be held at the facility, and video
teleconferencing is not available. Second, an ALJ will direct a
claimant to appear by telephone if the ALJ determines, either on his or
her own initiative, or at the request of the claimant or another party,
that extraordinary circumstances prevent the claimant from appearing in
person or by video teleconferencing.
Since an ALJ will direct a claimant's appearance by telephone only
under certain limited circumstances, we do not believe it is necessary
or appropriate to provide the claimant with an opportunity to object to
the mode of this appearance. However, we will use this provision on a
limited basis, and its goal is to promote efficiency of hearings. We
believe the policy is consistent with our goal of making the hearing
process more efficient for claimants because appearing by telephone
will allow claimants to have their hearings before an ALJ in the
shortest possible time period.
Claimants who are scheduled to appear by telephone will receive the
same due process rights currently available to all claimants. This
includes the right to object to the time or place of hearing under 20
CFR 404.936(d), 405.317, and 416.1436(d), which have been revised
accordingly. Regardless of the mode of appearance, we will also
continue to make reasonable accommodations for all claimants and
representatives. Therefore, we will adequately protect a claimants'
rights without placing additional limitations on our ability to
schedule a claimant's appearance at a hearing by telephone.
[[Page 35930]]
Regulatory Procedures
Executive Order 12866 as Supplemented by Executive Order 13563
We consulted with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and
determined that these final rules meet the requirements for a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563. Thus, OMB reviewed these final
rules.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
We certify that these final rules will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they
only affect individuals. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis
as provided in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, is not
required.
Paperwork Reduction Act
These final rules contain public reporting requirements in the
regulation sections listed below. We are seeking approval for these
regulation sections and for a new SSA form, which we will use to
collect the information required by these sections. Below we provide
burden estimates for the public reporting requirements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Average burden
Regulation section Description of public reporting respondents Frequency of per response Estimated
requirement (annually) response (minutes) annual burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
404.936(c)(1); 405.317(a)(1); 416.1436(d)(1)... For us to consider your change in 45,000 1 5 3,750
residence, you must submit evidence
verifying your new residence.
404.963(c)(2); 405.317(a)(2); 416.1436(d)(2)... If you notify us more than 30 days 13,500 1 10 2,250
after the date you receive our notice
that you object to appearing by video
teleconference, we will extend the
time period if you show good cause for
missing the deadline.
405.317(c)..................................... If you believe the issues contained in 45,000 1 5 3,750
the notice are incorrect, you should
notify the ALJ no later than 5 days
before the date of the hearing; you
must state the reason(s) for objection.
404.936(d); 405.317(a); 416.1436(d)............ If you object to video teleconferencing 850,000 1 5 70,833
you must notify us in writing within
30 days after you receive the notice.
404.936(e); 405.317(b); 416.1436(e)............ You must notify us if you wish to 900,000 1 30 450,000
object to the time and place in
writing no later than 5 days prior to
hearing or 30 days after receiving
notice of hearing; you must state the
reason(s) for objection and state the
time and place you want the hearing
held.
404.936(e)(1); 405.317(b)(1); 416.1436(e)(1)... If you notify us less than 5 days prior 5,000 1 5 417
to hearing, or more than 30 days after
receiving notice of hearing, we will
extend the time period if you show
good cause for missing the deadline.
404.938(a); 405.316(a); 416.1438(a)............ Indication in writing that respondent 4,000 1 2 133
does not wish to receive notice of
hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................... ....................................... 1,862,500 .............. .............. 531,133
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SSA submitted an Information Collection Request for clearance to
OMB. We are soliciting comments on the burden estimate; the need for
the information; its practical utility; ways to enhance its quality,
utility, and clarity; and ways to minimize the burden on respondents,
including the use of automated techniques or other forms of information
technology. If you would like to submit comments, please send them to
the following locations:
Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for SSA, Fax
Number: 202-395-6974, Email address: OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov.
Social Security Administration, OLCA, Attn: Reports Clearance Director,
3100 West High Rise, 6401 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21235, Fax:
410-966-2830, Email address: OR.Reports.Clearance@ssa.gov.
You can submit comments until July 25, 2014, which is 30 days after
the publication of this rule. To receive a copy of the OMB clearance
package, contact the SSA Reports Clearance Officer using any of the
above contact methods. We prefer to receive comments by email or fax.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 96.001, Social
Security--Disability Insurance; 96.002, Social Security--Retirement
Insurance; 96.004, Social Security--Survivors Insurance; and 96.006,
Supplemental Security Income)
List of Subjects
20 CFR Part 404
Administrative practice and procedure, Blind, Disability benefits,
Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Social Security.
20 CFR Part 405
Administrative practice and procedure, Blind, Disability benefits,
Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance, Public assistance
programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Social Security,
Supplemental Security Income (SSI).
20 CFR Part 416
Administrative practice and procedure, Aged, Blind, Disability
benefits, Public assistance programs, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Supplemental Security Income (SSI).
Dated: April 10, 2014.
Carolyn W. Colvin,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, we are amending 20 CFR
[[Page 35931]]
chapter III, parts 404, 405, and 416, as set forth below:
PART 404--FEDERAL OLD-AGE, SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY INSURANCE
(1950- )
Subpart J--Determinations, Administrative Review Process, and
Reopening of Determinations and Decisions
0
1. The authority citation for subpart J of part 404 continues to read
as follows:
Authority: Secs. 201(j), 204(f), 205(a)-(b), (d)-(h), and (j),
221, 223(i), 225, and 702(a)(5) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 401(j), 404(f), 405(a)-(b), (d)-(h), and (j), 421, 423(i),
425, and 902(a)(5)); sec. 5, Pub. L. 97-455, 96 Stat. 2500 (42
U.S.C. 405 note); secs. 5, 6(c)-(e), and 15, Pub. L. 98-460, 98
Stat. 1802 (42 U.S.C. 421 note); sec. 202, Pub. L. 108-203, 118
Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note).
0
2. Revise Sec. 404.929 to read as follows:
Sec. 404.929 Hearing before an administrative law judge-general.
If you are dissatisfied with one of the determinations or decisions
listed in Sec. 404.930, you may request a hearing. The Deputy
Commissioner for Disability Adjudication and Review, or his or her
delegate, will appoint an administrative law judge to conduct the
hearing. If circumstances warrant, the Deputy Commissioner, or his or
her delegate, may assign your case to another administrative law judge.
At the hearing, you may appear in person, by video teleconferencing,
or, under certain extraordinary circumstances, by telephone. You may
submit new evidence, examine the evidence used in making the
determination or decision under review, and present and question
witnesses. The administrative law judge who conducts the hearing may
ask you questions. He or she will issue a decision based on the
preponderance of the evidence in the hearing record. If you waive your
right to appear at the hearing, in person, by video teleconferencing,
or by telephone, the administrative law judge will make a decision
based on the preponderance of the evidence that is in the file and any
new evidence that may have been submitted for consideration.
0
3. In Sec. 404.936, revise paragraphs (b) and (c)(1), redesignate
paragraphs (d) through (h) as paragraphs (e) through (i), add a new
paragraph (d), and revise redesignated paragraphs (e) and (f), to read
as follows:
Sec. 404.936 Time and place for a hearing before an administrative
law judge.
* * * * *
(b) Where we hold hearings. We hold hearings in the 50 States, the
District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana
Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin
Islands. The ``place'' of the hearing is the hearing office or other
site(s) at which you and any other parties to the hearing are located
when you make your appearance(s) before the administrative law judge,
whether in person, by video teleconferencing, or by telephone.
(c) * * *
(1) We will consult with the administrative law judge to determine
the status of case preparation and to determine whether your
appearance, or the appearance of any other party to the hearing, will
be made in person, by video teleconferencing or, under extraordinary
circumstances, by telephone. The administrative law judge will
determine that your appearance, or the appearance of any other party to
the hearing, be conducted by video teleconferencing if video
teleconferencing equipment is available to conduct the appearance, use
of video teleconferencing to conduct the appearance would be more
efficient than conducting the appearance in person, and the
administrative law judge determines that there is no circumstance in
the particular case that prevents the use of video teleconferencing to
conduct the appearance. The administrative law judge will direct you or
another party to the hearing to appear by telephone when:
(i) An appearance in person is not possible, such as if you are
incarcerated, the facility will not allow a hearing to be held at the
facility, and video teleconferencing is not available; or
(ii) The administrative law judge determines, either on his or her
own, or at your request or at the request of any other party to the
hearing, that extraordinary circumstances prevent you or another party
to the hearing from appearing at the hearing in person or by video
teleconferencing.
* * * * *
(d) Objecting to appearing by video teleconferencing. Prior to
scheduling your hearing, we will notify you that we may schedule you to
appear by video teleconferencing. If you object to appearing by video
teleconferencing, you must notify us in writing within 30 days after
the date you receive the notice. If you notify us within that time
period and your residence does not change while your request for
hearing is pending, we will set your hearing for a time and place at
which you may make your appearance before the administrative law judge
in person.
(1) Notwithstanding any objections you may have to appearing by
video teleconferencing, if you change your residence while your request
for hearing is pending, we may determine how you will appear, including
by video teleconferencing, as provided in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section. For us to consider your change of residence when we schedule
your hearing, you must submit evidence verifying your new residence.
(2) If you notify us that you object to appearing by video
teleconferencing more than 30 days after the date you receive our
notice, we will extend the time period if you show you had good cause
for missing the deadline. To determine whether good cause exists for
extending the deadline, we use the standards explained in Sec.
404.911.
(e) Objecting to the time or place of the hearing. If you object to
the time or place of the hearing, you must:
(1) Notify us in writing at the earliest possible opportunity, but
not later than 5 days before the date set for the hearing or 30 days
after receiving notice of the hearing, whichever is earlier (or within
the extended time period if we extend the time as provided in paragraph
(e)(3) of this section); and
(2) State the reason(s) for your objection and state the time and
place you want the hearing to be held. We will change the time or place
of the hearing if the administrative law judge finds you have good
cause, as determined under paragraph (f) of this section. Section
404.938 provides procedures we will follow when you do not respond to a
notice of hearing.
(3) If you notify us that you object to the time or place of
hearing less than 5 days before the date set for the hearing or, if
earlier, more than 30 days after receiving notice of the hearing, we
will extend the time period if you show you had good cause for missing
the deadline. To determine whether good cause exists for extending the
deadline, we use the standards explained in Sec. 404.911.
(f) Good cause for changing the time or place. The administrative
law judge will determine whether good cause exists for changing the
time or place of your scheduled hearing. However, a finding that good
cause exists to reschedule the time or place of your hearing will not
change the assignment of the administrative law judge for your case,
unless we determine reassignment will promote more efficient
administration of the hearing process.
(1) We will reschedule your hearing, if your reason is one of the
following circumstances and is supported by the evidence:
[[Page 35932]]
(i) A serious physical or mental condition or incapacitating injury
makes it impossible for you or your representative to travel to the
hearing, or a death in the family occurs; or
(ii) Severe weather conditions make it impossible for you or your
representative to travel to the hearing.
(2) In determining whether good cause exists in circumstances other
than those set out in paragraph (f)(1) of this section, the
administrative law judge will consider your reason(s) for requesting
the change, the facts supporting it, and the impact of the proposed
change on the efficient administration of the hearing process. Factors
affecting the impact of the change include, but are not limited to, the
effect on the processing of other scheduled hearings, delays that might
occur in rescheduling your hearing, and whether we previously granted
you any changes in the time or place of your hearing. Examples of such
other circumstances that you might give for requesting a change in the
time or place of the hearing include, but are not limited to, the
following:
(i) You unsuccessfully attempted to obtain a representative and
need additional time to secure representation;
(ii) Your representative was appointed within 30 days of the
scheduled hearing and needs additional time to prepare for the hearing;
(iii) Your representative has a prior commitment to be in court or
at another administrative hearing on the date scheduled for the
hearing;
(iv) A witness who will testify to facts material to your case
would be unavailable to attend the scheduled hearing and the evidence
cannot be otherwise obtained;
(v) Transportation is not readily available for you to travel to
the hearing; or
(vi) You are unrepresented, and you are unable to respond to the
notice of hearing because of any physical, mental, educational, or
linguistic limitations (including any lack of facility with the English
language) which you may have.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 404.938, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 404.938 Notice of a hearing before an administrative law judge.
* * * * *
(b) Notice information. The notice of hearing will contain a
statement of the specific issues to be decided and tell you that you
may designate a person to represent you during the proceedings. The
notice will also contain an explanation of the procedures for
requesting a change in the time or place of your hearing, a reminder
that if you fail to appear at your scheduled hearing without good cause
the administrative law judge may dismiss your hearing request, and
other information about the scheduling and conduct of your hearing. You
will also be told if your appearance or that of any other party or
witness is scheduled to be made in person, by video teleconferencing,
or by telephone. If we have scheduled you to appear at the hearing by
video teleconferencing, the notice of hearing will tell you that the
scheduled place for the hearing is a video teleconferencing site and
explain what it means to appear at your hearing by video
teleconferencing.
* * * * *
PART 405--ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW PROCESS FOR ADJUDICATING INITIAL
DISABILITY CLAIMS
0
5. The authority citation for part 405 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 201(j), 205(a)-(b), (d)-(h), and (s), 221,
223(a)-(b), 702(a)(5), 1601, 1602, 1631, and 1633 of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401(j), 405(a)-(b), (d)-(h), and (s), 421,
423(a)-(b), 902(a)(5), 1381, 1381a, 1383, and 1383(b).
0
6. In Sec. 405.315, revise paragraphs (a), (b), and (c)(1), and add
new paragraphs (d) and (e), to read as follows:
Sec. 405.315 Time and place for a hearing before an administrative
law judge.
(a) General. We may set the time and place for the hearing. We may
change the time and place, if it is necessary. If we change the time
and place of the hearing, we will send you reasonable notice of the
change. We will notify you of the time and place of the hearing at
least 75 days before the date of the hearing, unless you agree to a
shorter notice period.
(b) Where we hold hearings. We hold hearings in the 50 States, the
District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana
Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin
Islands. The ``place'' of the hearing is the hearing office or other
site(s) at which you and any other parties to the hearing are located
when you make your appearance(s) before the administrative law judge,
whether in person, by video teleconferencing, or by telephone.
(c) * * *
(1) We will consult with the administrative law judge to determine
the status of case preparation and to determine whether your
appearance, or the appearance of any other party to the hearing, will
be made in person or by video teleconferencing or, under extraordinary
circumstances, by telephone. The administrative law judge will
determine that your appearance, or the appearance of any other party to
the hearing, be conducted by video teleconferencing if video
teleconferencing equipment is available to conduct the appearance, use
of video teleconferencing to conduct the appearance would be more
efficient than conducting the appearance in person, and the
administrative law judge determines that there is no circumstance in
the particular case that prevents the use of video teleconferencing to
conduct the appearance. The administrative law judge will direct you to
appear by telephone when:
(i) An appearance in person is not possible, such as if you are
incarcerated, the facility will not allow a hearing to be held at the
facility, and video teleconferencing is not available; or
(ii) The administrative law judge determines, either on his or her
own, or at your request or at the request of any other party to the
hearing, that extraordinary circumstances prevent you or another party
to the hearing from appearing at the hearing in person or by video
teleconferencing.
* * * * *
(d) Consultation procedures. Before we exercise the authority to
set the time and place for an administrative law judge's hearings, we
will consult with the appropriate hearing office chief administrative
law judge to determine if there are any reasons why we should not set
the time and place of the administrative law judge's hearings. If the
hearing office chief administrative law judge does not state a reason
that we believe justifies the limited number of hearings scheduled by
the administrative law judge, we will then consult with the
administrative law judge before deciding whether to begin to exercise
our authority to set the time and place for the administrative law
judge's hearings. If the hearing office chief administrative law judge
states a reason that we believe justifies the limited number of
hearings scheduled by the administrative law judge, we will not
exercise our authority to set the time and place for the administrative
law judge's hearings. We will work with the hearing office chief
administrative law judge to identify those circumstances where we can
assist the administrative law judge and address any impediment that may
affect the scheduling of hearings.
(e) Pilot program. The provisions in the first three sentences of
paragraph (a), the first sentence of paragraph (c)(1), and paragraph
(d) of this section are a
[[Page 35933]]
pilot program. These provisions will no longer be effective on August
9, 2014, unless we terminate them earlier or extend them beyond that
date by notice of a final rule in the Federal Register.
0
7. In Sec. 405.316, revise paragraphs (a) and (b)(5), to read as
follows:
Sec. 405.316 Notice of a hearing before an administrative law judge.
(a) Issuing the notice. After we set the time and place of the
hearing, we will mail notice of the hearing to you at your last known
address, or give the notice to you by personal service, unless you have
indicated in writing that you do not wish to receive this notice. We
will mail or serve the notice at least 75 days before the date of the
hearing, unless you agree to a shorter notice period.
(b) * * *
(5) Whether your appearance or that of any witness is scheduled to
be made in person, by video teleconferencing, or by telephone. If we
have scheduled you to appear at the hearing by video teleconferencing,
the notice of hearing will tell you that the scheduled place for the
hearing is a video teleconferencing site and explain what it means to
appear at your hearing by video teleconferencing.
* * * * *
0
8. Revise Sec. 405.317 to read as follows:
Sec. 405.317 Objections.
(a) Objecting to appearing by video teleconferencing. Prior to
scheduling your hearing, we will notify you that we may schedule you to
appear by video teleconferencing. If you object to appearing by video
teleconferencing, you must notify us in writing within 30 days after
the date you receive the notice. If you notify us within that time
period and your residence does not change while your request for
hearing is pending, we will set your hearing for a time and place at
which you may make your appearance before the administrative law judge
in person.
(1) Notwithstanding any objections you may have to appearing by
video teleconferencing, if you change your residence while your request
for hearing is pending, we may determine how you will appear, including
by video teleconferencing, as provided in Sec. 405.315(c). For us to
consider your change of residence when we schedule your hearing, you
must submit evidence verifying your new residence.
(2) If you notify us that you object to appearing by video
teleconferencing more than 30 days after the date you receive our
notice, we will extend the time period if you show you had good cause
for missing the deadline. To determine whether good cause exists for
extending the deadline, we use the standards explained in Sec. 405.20.
(b) Objecting to the time and place of the hearing. If you object
to the time or place of your hearing, you must:
(1) Notify us in writing at the earliest possible opportunity
before the date set for the hearing, but not later than 30 days after
receiving notice of the hearing. If you notify us that you object to
the time or place of hearing more than 30 days after receiving notice
of the hearing, we will extend the time period if you show you had good
cause for missing the deadline. To determine whether good cause exists
for extending the deadline, we use the standards explained in Sec.
405.20; and
(2) State the reason(s) for your objection and state the time and
place you want the hearing to be held. The administrative law judge
will consider your reason(s) for requesting the change, the facts
supporting it, and the impact of the proposed change on the efficient
administration of the hearing process. Factors affecting the impact of
the change include, but are not limited to, the effect on the
processing of other scheduled hearings, delays that might occur in
rescheduling your hearing, and whether we previously granted you any
changes in the time or place of your hearing. However, an objection to
the time or place of your hearing will not change the assignment of the
administrative law judge for your case, unless we determine
reassignment will promote more efficient administration of the hearing
process.
(c) Issues. If you believe that the issues contained in the hearing
notice are incorrect, you should notify the administrative law judge in
writing at the earliest possible opportunity, but you must notify him
or her no later than 5 business days before the date set for the
hearing. You must state the reason(s) for your objection. The
administrative law judge will make a decision on your objection either
at the hearing or in writing before the hearing.
0
9. In Sec. 405.350, revise the first sentence of paragraph (a) to read
as follows:
Sec. 405.350 Presenting evidence at a hearing before an
administrative law judge.
(a) * * * You have a right to appear before the administrative law
judge, either in person or, when the administrative law judge
determines that the conditions in Sec. 405.315(c) exist, by video
teleconferencing or telephone, to present evidence and to state your
position. * * *
* * * * *
PART 416--SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED, BLIND, AND
DISABLED
Subpart N--Determinations, Administrative Review Process, and
Reopening of Determinations and Decisions
0
10. The authority citation for subpart N of part 416 continues to read
as follows:
Authority: Secs. 702(a)(5), 1631, and 1633 of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 902(a)(5), 1383, and 1383b); sec. 202, Pub.
L. 108-203, 118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note).
0
11. Revise Sec. 416.1429 to read as follows:
Sec. 416.1429 Hearing before an administrative law judge-general.
If you are dissatisfied with one of the determinations or decisions
listed in Sec. 416.1430, you may request a hearing. The Deputy
Commissioner for Disability Adjudication and Review, or his or her
delegate, will appoint an administrative law judge to conduct the
hearing. If circumstances warrant, the Deputy Commissioner, or his or
her delegate, may assign your case to another administrative law judge.
At the hearing, you may appear in person, by video teleconferencing,
or, under certain extraordinary circumstances, by telephone. You may
submit new evidence, examine the evidence used in making the
determination or decision under review, and present and question
witnesses. The administrative law judge who conducts the hearing may
ask you questions. He or she will issue a decision based on the
preponderance of the evidence in the hearing record. If you waive your
right to appear at the hearing, in person, by video teleconferencing,
or by telephone, the administrative law judge will make a decision
based on the preponderance of the evidence that is in the file and any
new evidence that may have been submitted for consideration.
0
12. In Sec. 416.1436, revise paragraphs (b) and (c)(1), redesignate
paragraphs (d) through (h) as paragraphs (e) through (i), add a new
paragraph (d), and revise redesignated paragraphs (e) and (f), to read
as follows:
Sec. 416.1436 Time and place for a hearing before an administrative
law judge.
* * * * *
(b) Where we hold hearings. We hold hearings in the 50 States, the
District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana
Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin
Islands. The ``place'' of the hearing is the hearing
[[Page 35934]]
office or other site(s) at which you and any other parties to the
hearing are located when you make your appearance(s) before the
administrative law judge, whether in person, by video teleconferencing,
or by telephone.
(c) * * *
(1) We will consult with the administrative law judge to determine
the status of case preparation and to determine whether your
appearance, or the appearance of any other party to the hearing, will
be made in person, by video teleconferencing or, under extraordinary
circumstances, by telephone. The administrative law judge will
determine that your appearance, or the appearance of any other party to
the hearing, be conducted by video teleconferencing if video
teleconferencing equipment is available to conduct the appearance, use
of video teleconferencing to conduct the appearance would be more
efficient than conducting the appearance in person, and the
administrative law judge determines there is no circumstance in the
particular case that prevents the use of video teleconferencing to
conduct the appearance. The administrative law judge will direct you or
another party to the hearing to appear by telephone when:
(i) An appearance in person is not possible, such as if you are
incarcerated, the facility will not allow a hearing to be held at the
facility, and video teleconferencing is not available; or
(ii) The administrative law judge determines, either on his or her
own, or at your request or at the request of any other party to the
hearing, that extraordinary circumstances prevent you or another party
to the hearing from appearing at the hearing in person or by video
teleconferencing.
* * * * *
(d) Objecting to appearing by video teleconferencing. Prior to
scheduling your hearing, we will notify you that we may schedule you to
appear by video teleconferencing. If you object to appearing by video
teleconferencing, you must notify us in writing within 30 days after
the date you receive the notice. If you notify us within that time
period and your residence does not change while your request for
hearing is pending, we will set your hearing for a time and place at
which you may make your appearance before the administrative law judge
in person.
(1) Notwithstanding any objections you may have to appearing by
video teleconferencing, if you change your residence while your request
for hearing is pending, we may determine how you will appear, including
by video teleconferencing, as provided in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section. For us to consider your change of residence when we schedule
your hearing, you must submit evidence verifying your new residence.
(2) If you notify us that you object to appearing by video
teleconferencing more than 30 days after the date you receive our
notice, we will extend the time period if you show you had good cause
for missing the deadline. To determine whether good cause exists for
extending the deadline, we use the standards explained in Sec.
416.1411.
(e) Objecting to the time or place of the hearing. If you object to
the time or place of your hearing, you must:
(1) Notify us in writing at the earliest possible opportunity, but
not later than 5 days before the date set for the hearing or 30 days
after receiving notice of the hearing, whichever is earlier (or within
the extended time period if we extend the time as provided in paragraph
(e)(3) of this section); and
(2) State the reason(s) for your objection and state the time and
place you want the hearing to be held. We will change the time or place
of the hearing if the administrative law judge finds you have good
cause, as determined under paragraph (f) of this section. Section
416.1438 provides procedures we will follow when you do not respond to
a notice of hearing.
(3) If you notify us that you object to the time or place of
hearing less than 5 days before the date set for the hearing or, if
earlier, more than 30 days after receiving notice of the hearing, we
will extend the time period if you show you had good cause for missing
the deadline. To determine whether good cause exists for extending the
deadline, we use the standards explained in Sec. 416.1411.
(f) Good cause for changing the time or place. The administrative
law judge will determine whether good cause exists for changing the
time or place of your scheduled hearing. However, a finding that good
cause exists to reschedule the time or place of your hearing will not
change the assignment of the administrative law judge for your case,
unless we determine reassignment will promote more efficient
administration of the hearing process.
(1) We will reschedule your hearing, if your reason is one of the
following circumstances and is supported by the evidence:
(i) A serious physical or mental condition or incapacitating injury
makes it impossible for you or your representative to travel to the
hearing, or a death in the family occurs; or
(ii) Severe weather conditions make it impossible for you or your
representative to travel to the hearing.
(2) In determining whether good cause exists in circumstances other
than those set out in paragraph (f)(1) of this section, the
administrative law judge will consider your reason(s) for requesting
the change, the facts supporting it, and the impact of the proposed
change on the efficient administration of the hearing process. Factors
affecting the impact of the change include, but are not limited to, the
effect on the processing of other scheduled hearings, delays that might
occur in rescheduling your hearing, and whether we previously granted
you any changes in the time or place of your hearing. Examples of such
other circumstances that you might give for requesting a change in the
time or place of the hearing include, but are not limited to, the
following:
(i) You unsuccessfully attempted to obtain a representative and
need additional time to secure representation;
(ii) Your representative was appointed within 30 days of the
scheduled hearing and needs additional time to prepare for the hearing;
(iii) Your representative has a prior commitment to be in court or
at another administrative hearing on the date scheduled for the
hearing;
(iv) A witness who will testify to facts material to your case
would be unavailable to attend the scheduled hearing and the evidence
cannot be otherwise obtained;
(v) Transportation is not readily available for you to travel to
the hearing; or
(vi) You are unrepresented, and you are unable to respond to the
notice of hearing because of any physical, mental, educational, or
linguistic limitations (including any lack of facility with the English
language) which you may have.
* * * * *
0
13. In Sec. 416.1438, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 416.1438 Notice of a hearing before an administrative law judge.
* * * * *
(b) Notice information. The notice of hearing will contain a
statement of the specific issues to be decided and tell you that you
may designate a person to represent you during the proceedings. The
notice will also contain an explanation of the procedures for
requesting a change in the time or place of your hearing, a reminder
that if you fail to appear at your scheduled hearing without good cause
the administrative law judge may dismiss your hearing request, and
other information about the
[[Page 35935]]
scheduling and conduct of your hearing. You will also be told if your
appearance or that of any other party or witness is scheduled to be
made in person, by video teleconferencing, or by telephone. If we have
scheduled you to appear at the hearing by video teleconferencing, the
notice of hearing will tell you that the scheduled place for the
hearing is a video teleconferencing site and explain what it means to
appear at your hearing by video teleconferencing.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-14793 Filed 6-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191-02-P