Rescission of Social Security Acquiescence Ruling 86-3(5), 10806 [2020-03201]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
10806
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 37 / Tuesday, February 25, 2020 / Notices
Number of
respondents
Modality of completion
Average
burden per
response
(minutes)
Frequency
of response
Estimated
total annual
burden
(hours)
Average
theoretical
hourly cost
amount
(dollars) *
Total annual
opportunity
cost
(dollars) **
SSA–8508–BK (paper interview) .............
e8508 (electronic interview) .....................
230
4,370
1
1
60
60
230
4,370
* 10.22
* 10.22
** 2,351
** 44,661
Totals ................................................
4,600
........................
........................
4,600
........................
** 47,012
* We based this figure on average DI payments, as reported in SSA’s disability insurance payment data.
** This figure does not represent actual costs that SSA is imposing on recipients of Social Security payments to complete this application; rather, these are theoretical opportunity costs for the additional time respondents will spend to complete the application. There is no actual charge to
respondents to complete the application.
Dated: February 19, 2020.
Naomi Sipple,
Reports Clearance Officer, Social Security
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2020–03669 Filed 2–24–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191–02–P
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
[Docket No. SSA–2017–0046]
Rescission of Social Security
Acquiescence Ruling 86–3(5)
Social Security Administration.
Notice of Rescission of Social
Security Acquiescence Ruling 86–3(5)—
Martinez v. Heckler, 735 F.2d 795 (5th
Cir. 1984) —Disability Program—
Individuals Who Are Illiterate and
Unable To Communicate in English—
Titles II and XVI of the Social Security
Act.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
In accordance with 20 CFR
402.35(b)(2), 404.985(e)(4) and
416.1485(e)(4), the Commissioner of
Social Security gives notice of the
rescission of Social Security
Acquiescence Ruling (AR) 86–3(5).
DATES: We will apply this rescission
notice on April 27, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan
O’Brien, Office of Disability Policy,
Social Security Administration, 6401
Security Boulevard, Baltimore,
Maryland 21235–6401, (410) 597–1632.
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: We use
ARs in accordance with 20 CFR
402.35(b)(2), 404.985(a), (b), and
416.1485(a), (b) to explain how we
apply a holding in a United States Court
of Appeals decision that we determine
conflicts with our interpretation of a
provision of the Social Security Act
(Act) or regulations when the
Government has decided not to seek
further review of that decision or is
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:34 Feb 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
unsuccessful on further review. As
provided by 20 CFR 404.985(e)(4) and
416.1485(e)(4), we may rescind an AR as
obsolete and apply our interpretation of
the Act or regulations if we
subsequently clarify, modify or revoke
the regulation or ruling that was the
subject of a circuit court holding that we
determined conflicts with our
interpretation of the Social Security Act
or regulations.
In 1984, in Martinez v. Heckler, the
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
considered the issue of whether the
vocational rules 1 applicable to those
individuals who were illiterate or
unable to communicate in English were
applicable to individuals who were
illiterate and unable to communicate in
English.
The court concluded that because Mr.
Martinez was both illiterate and unable
to communicate in English, he did not
fall within the criteria set forth in Rule
201.23 (sedentary, younger individual
aged 18–44, illiterate or unable to
communicate in English, unskilled or
no work). The implication of the
decision was that the rule did not apply
to individuals who were both illiterate
and unable to communicate in English.
In response to the decision, we issued
AR 86–3(5).2 In the ruling, we explained
that we must make a finding on
illiteracy and inability to communicate
in English when both are alleged or
appear to be in question for an
individual residing in Texas,
Mississippi, or Louisiana and seeking
disability benefits or continuation of
disability benefits under Title II or Title
XVI. We clarified that if an individual
aged 18 to 44 is limited to sedentary
work with unskilled or no work history
is found to be both illiterate and unable
to communicate in English, we cannot
apply the Rule 201.23 under the holding
of the Martinez decision. We instructed
adjudicators to use the vocational rules
1 See
20 CFR part 404 Subpart P Appendix 2.
86–3(5) applied only to cases in which the
individual resided in Texas, Mississippi or
Louisiana at the time of the determination or
decision at any level of administrative review.
2 AR
PO 00000
Frm 00160
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
only as guidance for decisionmaking in
such cases. We also issued the same
guidance for Rule 202.16 (light, younger
individual aged 18–44, illiterate or
unable to communicate in English,
unskilled or no work) in the ruling.
We are revising our rules to remove
the education category inability to
communicate in English on February 25,
2020. The revision will become effective
on April 27, 2020. Because we are
eliminating the education category
‘‘inability to communicate in English,’’
the instructions contained in AR 86–
3(5) will be obsolete as of that date.
Consequently, we are rescinding AR 86–
3(5) effective on April 27, 2020.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance,
Programs Nos. 96.001, Social Security—
Disability Insurance; 96.002, Social
Security—Retirement Insurance; 96.004,
Social Security—Survivors Insurance;
96.006—Supplemental Security Income.)
Dated: January 30, 2020.
Andrew Saul,
Commissioner of Social Security.
[FR Doc. 2020–03201 Filed 2–24–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 11033]
30-Day Notice of Proposed Information
Collection: Request for Determination
of Possible Loss of United States
Citizenship
Notice of request for public
comment and submission to OMB of
proposed collection of information.
ACTION:
The Department of State has
submitted the information collection
described below to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
approval. In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 we
are requesting comments on this
collection from all interested
individuals and organizations. The
purpose of this Notice is to allow 30
days for public comment.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25FEN1.SGM
25FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 10806]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03201]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
[Docket No. SSA-2017-0046]
Rescission of Social Security Acquiescence Ruling 86-3(5)
AGENCY: Social Security Administration.
ACTION: Notice of Rescission of Social Security Acquiescence Ruling 86-
3(5)--Martinez v. Heckler, 735 F.2d 795 (5th Cir. 1984) --Disability
Program--Individuals Who Are Illiterate and Unable To Communicate in
English--Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with 20 CFR 402.35(b)(2), 404.985(e)(4) and
416.1485(e)(4), the Commissioner of Social Security gives notice of the
rescission of Social Security Acquiescence Ruling (AR) 86-3(5).
DATES: We will apply this rescission notice on April 27, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan O'Brien, Office of Disability
Policy, Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard,
Baltimore, Maryland 21235-6401, (410) 597-1632. 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: We use ARs in accordance with 20 CFR
402.35(b)(2), 404.985(a), (b), and 416.1485(a), (b) to explain how we
apply a holding in a United States Court of Appeals decision that we
determine conflicts with our interpretation of a provision of the
Social Security Act (Act) or regulations when the Government has
decided not to seek further review of that decision or is unsuccessful
on further review. As provided by 20 CFR 404.985(e)(4) and
416.1485(e)(4), we may rescind an AR as obsolete and apply our
interpretation of the Act or regulations if we subsequently clarify,
modify or revoke the regulation or ruling that was the subject of a
circuit court holding that we determined conflicts with our
interpretation of the Social Security Act or regulations.
In 1984, in Martinez v. Heckler, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit considered the issue of whether the vocational rules \1\
applicable to those individuals who were illiterate or unable to
communicate in English were applicable to individuals who were
illiterate and unable to communicate in English.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 20 CFR part 404 Subpart P Appendix 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The court concluded that because Mr. Martinez was both illiterate
and unable to communicate in English, he did not fall within the
criteria set forth in Rule 201.23 (sedentary, younger individual aged
18-44, illiterate or unable to communicate in English, unskilled or no
work). The implication of the decision was that the rule did not apply
to individuals who were both illiterate and unable to communicate in
English.
In response to the decision, we issued AR 86-3(5).\2\ In the
ruling, we explained that we must make a finding on illiteracy and
inability to communicate in English when both are alleged or appear to
be in question for an individual residing in Texas, Mississippi, or
Louisiana and seeking disability benefits or continuation of disability
benefits under Title II or Title XVI. We clarified that if an
individual aged 18 to 44 is limited to sedentary work with unskilled or
no work history is found to be both illiterate and unable to
communicate in English, we cannot apply the Rule 201.23 under the
holding of the Martinez decision. We instructed adjudicators to use the
vocational rules only as guidance for decisionmaking in such cases. We
also issued the same guidance for Rule 202.16 (light, younger
individual aged 18-44, illiterate or unable to communicate in English,
unskilled or no work) in the ruling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ AR 86-3(5) applied only to cases in which the individual
resided in Texas, Mississippi or Louisiana at the time of the
determination or decision at any level of administrative review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are revising our rules to remove the education category
inability to communicate in English on February 25, 2020. The revision
will become effective on April 27, 2020. Because we are eliminating the
education category ``inability to communicate in English,'' the
instructions contained in AR 86-3(5) will be obsolete as of that date.
Consequently, we are rescinding AR 86-3(5) effective on April 27, 2020.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, Programs Nos. 96.001,
Social Security--Disability Insurance; 96.002, Social Security--
Retirement Insurance; 96.004, Social Security--Survivors Insurance;
96.006--Supplemental Security Income.)
Dated: January 30, 2020.
Andrew Saul,
Commissioner of Social Security.
[FR Doc. 2020-03201 Filed 2-24-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191-02-P
