1. a. 

   The 12-month duration requirement for statutory blindness applies to Title II claims for DIB, Childhood Disability Benefits (CDB), and Disabled Widow(er)’s Benefits (DWB) with the following exceptions.

2. b. 

   There is no duration requirement for:

   • •

     DIB, DWB, and CDB when the claimant is age 55 or older and work comparability provisions apply. For more information about the work comparability provisions, see DI 26005.001E in this section.

   • •

     DIB freeze at any age. See DI 26001.010D regarding duration and freeze.

There is no duration requirement for statutory blindness for Title XVI adult and child claims. See DI 26005.005 Title XVI Statutory Blindness Evaluation Issues.

The following chart shows the duration requirements for blindness for Title II and Title XVI.

SGA earnings guidelines are higher for claimants with statutory blindness than for nonblind claimants. See DI 10501.015 and DI 24001.025 for the tables of SGA earnings guidelines.

We use the SGA earnings guidelines for blind claimants in the evaluation of work activity for initial and continuing DIB, CDB, and DWB entitlement.

NOTE: If the issue of blindness arises during a work CDR, the FO may send the folder to the DDS for a blindness determination. See DI 13010.135 G.

The higher blind SGA earnings level provides blind DIB, CDB, and DWB claimants and beneficiaries the opportunity to work for higher earnings than claimants and beneficiaries disabled by other impairments without affecting benefit payments.

Section 223(d)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act contains an alternate occupational definition of disability for blind DIB, CDB, and DWB claimants age 55 or older.

We may find a statutorily blind DIB, CDB, or DWB claimant age 55 or older disabled if he or she is unable to perform SGA requiring skills or abilities comparable to those of any gainful activity in which he or she was previously engaged with some regularity and over a substantial period of time.

This definition of disability for blind claimants age 55 or older differs from the regular definition of disability as follows:

• •

  There is no duration requirement.

• •

  Work activity is determined to be “comparable SGA” or “noncomparable SGA.”

• •

  A claimant may become entitled to benefit status even though he or she is performing SGA at the time of entitlement if the work is noncomparable.

• •

  A claimant who is performing noncomparable SGA may be entitled to a period of disability and disability benefit status; however, we will suspend cash benefit payments as long as he or she is actually performing SGA.

If a blind claimant is entitled to benefit status under the comparability provisions, and we suspend benefits due to SGA, the claimant does not need to file a new application to receive disability benefit payments when he or she stops SGA.

This differs from the requirement for DIB claimants in regular freeze status only who must file a new application to receive disability benefit payments when SGA stops. CDB and DWB claimants are not eligible for a freeze.

If we determine a DIB or DWB claimant is statutorily blind and performing noncomparable SGA, we may count the period of time beginning with the first month of disability toward the waiting period while the claimant is performing SGA.

If SGA continues for 5 full months or more, disability benefit payments may begin as soon as the claimant stops SGA. This differs from the requirement for DIB claimants in regular freeze status only who must serve a waiting period of 5 full calendar months after SGA stops to receive disability benefit payments.

NOTE: CDB claimants serve no waiting period.

A disability determination requires a comparison of the claimant’s skills and abilities in the periods before and after the onset of blindness or age 55, whichever is later.

• •

  The FO is responsible for determinations as to whether work before and after onset of blindness or age 55 (whichever is later) is SGA. This may require use of the blind or nonblind work test of SGA or both in evaluating a single period of work because of the differences in SGA dollar criteria based on the year the claimant performed work.

• •

  The DDS is responsible for the comparability determination in initial and reconsideration cases, and in continuing disability review (CDR) cases where there is a medical issue. The DDS may request FO assistance if needed to determine a work-comparability issue.

  NOTE: If the DDS needs to contact an employer, review Form SSA-827 for the claimant’s permission to contact employers, as explained in DI 11005.055B.

• •

  The Office of Disability and International Operations, Program Service Center, Disability Processing Branch, is responsible for work comparability determinations in CDRs without medical issues.

1. a. 

   If a claimant is not performing SGA, we assume that the claimant cannot do any work, including work that requires skills and abilities comparable to those of any SGA that the claimant had done with some regularity and over a substantial period.

   However, if, before stopping work, the claimant performed any SGA after the onset of blindness or age 55 (whichever is later), compare the work done before and after the onset of blindness or age 55.

2. b. 

   Since the ability to see is usually such an essential requirement of work performed in the competitive labor market, blindness itself constitutes a major loss of job skills and abilities.

   Even though a claimant who is age 55 or older and statutorily blind manages to work despite this severe impairment, we will frequently find that the skills and abilities required by the claimant's current work are not actually comparable to those required by the work he or she did previously. See Examples 1, 2, and 4 at the end of this section.

3. c. 

   There are instances when we may find a claimant successfully performing comparable work. This may occur when:

   • •

     there has been a progressive reduction in sight to which the claimant has been making a gradual work adjustment so that he or she is able essentially to continue to perform usual work even after reaching the level of blindness; or

   • •

     the nature of the skills and abilities required in work previously performed with sight are such that he or she can transfer at least some of them to the successful performance of similar or different types of work, even after onset of blindness. See Example 3 at the end of this section.

4. d. 

   A difference in types of duties in different jobs is by itself not sufficient for a determination of noncomparability. Also, the fact that later work does not require all of the skills and abilities used in the previous work means that the work is noncomparable.

   The crucial issue is whether the major basic skills and abilities required in work performed after blindness and age 55 are comparable to those required in work performed prior to that time.

   If a claimant uses any new and significant skills in performing later work, find that the work is noncomparable.

5. e. 

   In making comparisons, give consideration to such physical requirements as:

   • •

     vision, eye-hand, eye-foot, or other coordination; and

   • •

     ability to travel.

In addition, consider mental requirements such as:

• •

  educational background,

• •

  professional and technical knowledge and experience,

• •

  communication skills, and

• •

  similar skills and abilities that may remain useful even without sight.

Example 1 – Noncomparable SGA

David became statutorily blind in June 2011 at age 57. His previous regular work, which lasted for 15 years, had been as an auto mechanic, ending in May 2011.

After a brief period of training, he started SGA in August 2011 as a vending stand operator in a public building.

Since the skills or abilities required in this current work are not comparable to those required in his previous work, we found David entitled to DIB under the work comparability provisions, as explained in DI 26005.001E in this section.

His 5-month waiting period was from June through October 2011 even though in some of those months he performed SGA, because that work did not require skills or abilities comparable to those of his previous regular work.

We withheld DIB payments because David was performing SGA. However, in June 2012 he notified the FO that he had stopped working at the end of May 2012. We paid benefits beginning with June 2012.

We will continue to pay David benefits unless he again performs SGA, at which time we will need to determine whether we should suspend benefits immediately or after a trial work period.

Example 2 – Noncomparable SGA

Before she became blind at age 52, Ann had been a mathematics teacher in junior and senior high schools.

After losing her sight, she stopped working as a teacher. She subsequently learned to read and write fluently in Braille. At age 56, she started a new job as an editorial assistant for a Braille book publisher for the blind. She does her work with the help of a Braille keyboard and other special aids.

Ann’s current work differs materially from her previous regular work (before age 55) in the skills and abilities it requires from her previous regular work. She has had to become skilled not only in Braille but also in special writing, editorial review, and publication techniques to be able to perform the duties of her new job adequately.

Because she had to acquire new skills and abilities to be able to work, it is reasonable to find that Ann can no longer perform SGA requiring skills or abilities comparable to those of her previous regular work.

Accordingly, we would find Ann under a disability for cash benefit purposes with payments withheld for any months in which she performs SGA.

Example 3 – Comparable SGA

John had been a clergyman for many years, concerned with visiting the sick and bereaved, officiating at religious ceremonies, studying and preparing sermons, and preaching.

After becoming statutorily blind at age 47, John started a new job as an instructor in ethics and religion at a local college where he worked from age 47 to age 57. He also performed duties as a counselor to students.

While John needed some assistance at times in moving about, particularly between his residence and the college, and occasionally needed someone to read to him, the major skills, knowledge, and abilities required to perform his new work were essentially comparable to those he used in his former activities (before age 55).

Accordingly, we could reasonably determine that John does not meet the comparability provisions. We would deny his DIB claim, although he would be entitled to a disability freeze.

Example 4 – Noncomparable SGA

Before becoming blind at age 56, Bob had been a heat treater for a tool manufacturer. He placed cold metal objects on a special type of hanger and moved the hanger into various heated situations to harden the steel.

Since this job required good eyesight to avoid accidents while moving heavy steel parts above the heads of other workers, Bob could no longer do it after the onset of blindness. However, he did work in another job created especially for him, screwing together small plastic parts, which were brought to him and taken away when finished.

Although we found this latter job was SGA, we determined that Bob was entitled to DIB under the work comparability provisions, as explained in DI 26005.001E in this section, because he could no longer perform SGA requiring skills or abilities comparable to those of his previous regular work as a heat treater. However, we withheld benefit payments while he was performing SGA in his current job.