ALJ Hiring?

      Posters on an online message board mostly frequented by wannabe Administrative Law Judges seem convinced that Social Security will soon be hiring more ALJs. We’ll see.

New Requirement For Those Representing Claimants

     Social Security has issued a newly amended section of its HALLEX Manual on Rules and Standards Governing The Conduct Of Representatives. By the way, HALLEX doesn't stand for anything. It's just the name of the agency's Hearings and Appeals Manual. This part of the section appears to be new:

 [A] representative must: ...

Disclose in writing, at the time a medical or vocational opinion is submitted to SSA or as soon as the representative is aware of the submission, if:

1. The representative's employee or any individual contracting with the representative drafted, prepared, or issued the medical or vocational opinion; or

2. The representative referred or suggested that the claimant seek an examination from, treatment by, or the assistance of, the individual providing opinion evidence.

NOTE 1:

The agency must report to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) the number of disclosures received pursuant to 20 CFR 404.1740(b)(5)-(9) and 416.1540(b)(5)-(9). To assist with disclosure reporting requirements, Office of Hearings Operations (OHO) and Office of Appellate Operations (OAO) staff will ensure that any disclosures described in this subsection (Hearings, Appeals, and Litigation Law (HALLEX) manual I-1-1-40 A.5.) are filed into the electronic claim(s) file (eView) using the document type “Required Disclosure – Medical (3076)” or “Required Disclosure – Vocational (1088),” depending on the type of evidence submitted with the disclosure.

NOTE 2:

A representative must submit a separate disclosure each time they submit opinion evidence that meets the requirements in 20 CFR 404.1740(b)(5) and 416.1540(b)(5) and described in this subsection. A single disclosure for multiple opinions that meet those requirements is not sufficient. ...

    I question whether the agency can impose an affirmative duty such as this "Required Disclosure" in a footnote to a staff manual. How does a mere staff manual bind members of the public? Doesn't this require notice and comment under the Administrative Procedure Act? If nothing else, this appears to violate the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    It's unclear whether this provision applies to forms provided by attorneys to doctors to complete. Generally, attorneys place a legend on these forms saying where the form came from in order to satisfy the agency. Does this special reporting requirement apply to situations where the attorney merely provides a form but does not help with completing the form?

New Acting Inspector General

Ware

     A press release from yesterday:

Today, Hannibal “Mike” Ware joined the Social Security Administration (SSA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) as Acting Inspector General. He will continue to serve in his role as the Inspector General of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), providing leadership to both agencies until a permanent SSA Inspector General is appointed. ...

“I am honored to have the confidence of the President to provide interim leadership within SSA OIG and to simultaneously continue my commitment to the mission of SBA OIG,” said Inspector General Ware. “This dual role underscores the importance of strong, independent oversight across federal programs to ensure they operate effectively and with integrity.  I am committed to keeping the heads of both establishments and Congress fully and currently informed of the oversight activities and findings.

CDRs To Resume

     Social Security is resuming Continuing Disability Reviews (CDRs) in October for the new federal fiscal year. The CDRs had been suspended due to the huge backlog of cases awaiting a decision on initial claims. Resuming CDRs is likely to slow down Disability Determination Services (DDS) work on initial claims.

Listen To The Voters

      From a Data For Progress poll:

What 

This Is Going To Be A Trip For Those Of You Who Have Never Watched John Oliver Before

WEP And GPO Tactics Raise Concerns Among Republican Legislators

     From The Hill:

A group of House Republicans is making a rare move that would force a vote on a bill to reform aspects of Social Security, stirring unrest in the conference.

The bill at the heart of the push, also dubbed the Social Security Fairness Act, seeks to do away with the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO), a proposal that backers on both sides of the aisle argue is long overdue.

The bill enjoys support from more than 100 House Republicans, and almost four dozen have cosigned the effort to use what’s known as a discharge petition to force consideration of the bill — and the strategy is rubbing some in the conference the wrong way.

“In a well-run Congress, no legislator signs a discharge petition if you’re a majority. That is a rule that is never broken,” Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.) told The Hill. “And the fact that 47 of my colleagues signed a discharge petition shows that we have an utter lack of discipline.” ...

Republicans say the matter was a topic of debate in a conference meeting earlier this week. ...

    Regardless of the House vote, it's very unlikely that this legislation will be voted on in the Senate.

...

I Don't Understand

     I recently received the message reproduced below. I'm sure that other attorneys who represent claimants have received the same message.

    It sounds as if I and my firm need to file new forms SSA-1694 (registration of law firm or other entity) and SSA-1699 (registration of individual attorney or representative) and need to start using a new form SSA-1696 (appointment of representative). The thing is that when I look online for these new forms, all I find are old versions of the forms. Does Social Security intend to issue new versions of these forms? Why would they send out a mass e-mail like this when they haven't completed the new forms yet?

    When I think about the "changes" that have been announced, I can't figure out why new forms would be required anyway since the "changes" seems to amount to little more than lip service to a federal court decision.

Changes to Rules for Claimant Representation and Provisions for Direct Payment to Entities On August 21, 2024, we published a final rule, Changes to the Administrative Rules for Claimant Representation and Provisions for Direct Payment to Entities, in the Federal Register. We’ve made changes to our regulations to allow representatives of Social Security claimants to assign direct payment of their authorized fees to an entity with which they are affiliated. We will implement this final rule in two phases. To learn more about both phases, including requirements for representatives and entities, please visit our webpage: https://www.ssa.gov/representation/2024NewRule.htm. Here are some key changes:   Starting September 30, 2024, anyone who has not previously registered with us and who wants to be appointed as a representative must register with us using Form SSA-1699 (Representative Registration) before we will recognize a new appointment request.    Starting December 9, 2024, representatives must use Form SSA-1696 (Claimant’s Appointment of a Representative) for new or updated appointments.    Starting December 9, 2024, consistent with Marasco & Nesselbush, LLP v. Collins, 6 F.4th 150 (1st Cir. 2021), we will directly pay authorized fees to a registered entity when a representative assigns direct payment of their fee to that entity.       Generally, for direct payment to an entity:    The entity must register with us using our revised Form SSA-1694 (Entity Registration and Taxpayer Information).     The representative must register with us and affiliate with the entity using Form SSA-1699 (Representative Registration).    The representative must assign direct payment of the fee to the entity using the revised Form SSA-1696 (Claimant’s Appointment of a Representative).     The representative and the entity must both be eligible for direct payment.    Please share this information with other interested parties. We appreciate your support.    Learn More