Last Update: 9/1/2005 (Transmittal II-5-08)
HA 02510.002 Vacating the Administrative
Law Judge's Decision When the Appeals Council Grants Review to
Remand
Renumbered from HALLEX section II-5-1-2
|
Appeals
Council Interpretation
|
|
SUBJECT |
: |
Vacating the Administrative Law
Judge's Decision When the Appeals Council Grants Review to Remand |
|
|
|
|
|
ISSUE |
: |
Should the Appeals Council continue
to vacate the decision of the Administrative Law Judge when it remands
a case? |
|
|
|
|
|
DISCUSSION |
: |
The Appeals Council considered
whether, upon granting review to remand a case under Social Security
Administration Regulations at 20 CFR §§ 404.967, 404.977,
416.1467 and 416.1477, to continue to vacate the entire Administrative
Law Judge's decision, or to vacate only a part of the Administrative Law
Judge's decision and remand the case to the Administrative Law Judge
for further action only on that part of the decision vacated by
the order. The Appeals Council concluded, however, that the latter
procedure would limit the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge
to deal with other matters requiring resolution which may come into
issue during the course of the subsequent proceedings. In addition,
the procedure would create administrative problems and would cause
significant confusion among affected claimants. Thus, to maintain
flexibility in the hearing process and avoid unnecessary complexity
in the appeals process, the Appeals Council decided to continue
its operating practices and procedures with regard to vacating hearing
decisions except to the extent noted herein. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With regard to partially favorable
decisions, if an Administrative Law Judge holds, for example, that
a claimant is under a disability but finds that the period of disability
began later than alleged, the Appeals Council will, upon remand,
vacate only that part of the decision pertaining to the unfavorable
period and affirm the favorable portion if the favorable action
is supported by substantial evidence. Similarly, if the Administrative
Law Judge holds that the claimant is entitled to a closed period
of disability but the Appeals Council questions whether the disability
has ceased, the Council will vacate that portion of the decision
which holds that the period of disability ended, but affirm the
decision that the claimant was under a disability as of the date
established. In these situations, the Appeals Council will issue
a combined Affirmation/Remand Order to permit prompt effectuation
of the favorable portion of the decision. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In a case involving concurrent
Title II and Title XVI claims, if the date last insured has expired
and the Appeals Council agrees with the decision in the Title II
claim but disagrees with the decision in the Title XVI claim, it
will deny review of the Title II claim and vacate the Title XVI
decision. The Council will continue to issue a separate denial notice
and remand order in these cases. In all other circumstances, the
Appeals Council will vacate the Administrative Law Judge's decision
in its entirety. This in no way limits the authority or discretion
of the Appeals Council to state in its orders of remand that it
concurs with specific findings and conclusions, or agrees generally
with portions of the decisional analysis. |
|
|
|
|
|
INTERPRETATION |
: |
The Appeals Council will continue
to vacate the Administrative Law Judge's decision upon remand except
in two circumstances: (1) when the Administrative Law Judge's decision
is partially favorable and the Appeals Council agrees with the favorable conclusion
but not the entire decision; and (2) in concurrent claims under
separate Titles, when the Appeals Council finds the decision pertaining
to one Title is supported by substantial evidence but not the decision
under the other Title. In the case of a partially favorable decision,
the Appeals Council will vacate only that part of the decision which
it questions, and leave undisturbed the favorable portion of the
decision which it accepts. In concurrent claims, the Appeals Council
will vacate only the decision pertaining to the Title with which
it disagrees. |
|
APPLICATION |
: |
The Appeals Council will apply
this interpretation in all cases that come before it involving the
same issue. |
|
|
|
|
|
EFFECTIVE DATE |
: |
October 4, 1989 |
|
|
|
|
|
CROSS-REFERENCE |
: |
20 CFR §§ 404.967, 404.977 and
416.1467, 416.1477; HALLEX, §HA 01370.001 |