While an administrative law judge (ALJ) may only request clarification of an Appeals Council (AC) remand order in limited circumstances (see Hearings, Appeals and Litigation Law (HALLEX) manual HA 01210.085), there are other circumstances when feedback to the AC is appropriate. The AC feedback initiative (ACFI) provides feedback to the AC regarding its remand orders. ACFI referrals facilitate discussion about specific issues, including inconsistent application of Social Security Administration policy or potential training needs at both the AC and hearing level. Case specific communication between ALJs and the AC outside of the ACFI is inappropriate, regardless of whether the case is pending or closed.

If an ALJ receives an AC remand order that does not meet the criteria for clarification under HALLEX HA 01210.085, but the ALJ, based on their understanding of policy, determines it is unclear, may demonstrate inconsistent application of policy by the AC, or, while technically correct, contains only insignificant errors that do not warrant remand, the ALJ can refer the case through the ACFI.

Examples of appropriate ACFI referrals include:

• •

  The AC issues a remand order for two reasons and one of the reasons is a mistake (e.g., the AC missed a document in the file that contained the authorization for the Hearing Office Chief Administrative Law Judge (HOCALJ) to sign a decision for the ALJ who held the hearing (HALLEX HA 01280.040 B)); or

• •

  The AC issues a remand order that contains a clear directive(s) but does not set forth the justification for the directive(s).

If the conditions in subsection B above are met, an ALJ can refer a case through the ACFI. To refer a case, the ALJ will:

• •

  Prepare an e-mail with the subject line “AC Feedback Initiative Referral,” and include in the body of the email the claimant's name, Social Security Number, and a brief statement identifying the problem with the remand order; and

• •

  Send the email to a designated mailbox in the regional office (RO).

The designated RO mailboxes are:

• •

  Region 1: ^OHO R1 R2 Programs

• •

  Region 2: ^OHO R1 R2 Programs

• •

  Region 3: ^OHO R3 Remand Feedback Initiative

• •

  Region 4: ^OHO Atlanta RO Remand Feedback

• •

  Region 5: ^OHO R5 Remand Initiative

• •

  Region 6: ^OHO R6 ALJ Comments

• •

  Region 7: ^OHO R7 Remand Feedback Initiative

• •

  Region 8: ^OHO R8 Remand Feedback

• •

  Region 9: ^OHO San Francisco RO Remand Feedback

• •

  Region 10: ^OHO RX Remand Feedback

• •

  National Hearing Center: |||OHO OCALJ NSD NHC Central Office

On receipt, RO personnel will evaluate the referral and decide whether to forward the referral for further consideration to the Division of Program Support (DPS) in the Office of the Chief Administrative Law Judge (OCALJ). When a referral is appropriate, RO personnel will send the referral to OCALJ at |||DCDA OHO HQ OCALJ DPS . The RO will advise the ALJ either that the referral was forwarded to OCALJ or will provide the reason that it did not forward the referral.

OCALJ will evaluate the referral and decide whether to forward the referral to the AC for review. If OCALJ forwards the referral to the AC, it will advise the RO and referring ALJ via email. If OCALJ decides not to forward the referral, it will advise the RO and the HOCALJ via email of the reason the referral was not sent to the AC.

The AC will evaluate the issue and take any necessary action to provide feedback to the appropriate individuals in the Office of Appellate Operations. In some cases, the AC may use the referrals to make recommendations regarding policies or procedures, or to recommend additional training.