[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 67 (Thursday, April 6, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17994-18001]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-8356]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

20 CFR Parts 404 and 416

[Regulations Nos. 4 and 16]
RIN 0960-AE 96


Federal Old-Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance and 
Supplemental Security Income for the Aged, Blind, and Disabled; 
Determining Disability and Blindness; Clarification of ``Age'' as a 
Vocational Factor

AGENCY: Social Security Administration.

ACTION: Final rules.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are revising the Social Security and Supplemental Security 
Income (SSI) disability regulations to clarify our consideration of 
``age'' as a vocational factor at the last step of our sequential 
evaluation process for determining whether an individual is disabled 
under title II or title XVI of the Social Security Act (the Act). We 
are also amending our rules to better explain how we consider 
transferability of skills for individuals who are of ``advanced age'' 
(age 55 or older) in deciding whether such individuals can make an 
adjustment to other work.

DATES: These rules will be effective May 8, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Georgia E. Myers, Regulations Officer, 
Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 
21235-6401, 1-410-965-3632 or TTY 1-800-966-5609 for information about 
these rules. For information on eligibility or filing for benefits, 
call our national toll-free number, 1-800-772-1213 or TTY 1-800-325-
0778.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Act provides, in title II, for the 
payment of disability benefits to persons insured under the Act. Title 
II also provides for the payment of child's insurance benefits for 
persons who become disabled before age 22, and for the payment of 
widow's and widower's insurance benefits for disabled widows, widowers, 
and surviving divorced spouses of insured persons. In addition, the Act 
provides, in title XVI, for SSI payments to persons who are aged, 
blind, or disabled and who have limited income and resources.
    For adults (including persons claiming child's insurance benefits 
based on disability under title II), ``disability'' is defined in the 
Act under both title II and title XVI as the ``inability to engage in 
any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically 
determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to 
result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a 
continuous period of not less than 12 months.'' Sections 223(d) and 
1614(a) of the Act also state that an individual ``shall be determined 
to be under a disability only if his physical or mental impairment or 
impairments are of such severity that he is not only unable to do his 
previous work but cannot, considering his age, education, and work 
experience, engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work which 
exists in the national economy, regardless of whether such work exists 
in the immediate area in which he lives, or whether a specific job 
vacancy exists for him, or whether he would be hired if he applied for 
work.''
    To implement the process for determining whether an individual is 
disabled based upon this statutory definition, our regulations at 
Secs. 404.1520 and 416.920 provide for a five-step sequential 
evaluation process as follows:
    1. Is the individual engaging in substantial gainful activity? If 
the individual is working and the work is substantial gainful activity 
(SGA), we find that he or she is not disabled. Otherwise, we proceed to 
step 2 of the sequence.
    2. Does the individual have an impairment or combination of 
impairments that is severe? If the individual does not have an 
impairment or combination of impairments that is severe, we find that 
he or she is not disabled. If the individual has an impairment or 
combination of impairments that is severe, we proceed to step 3 of the 
sequence.
    3. Does the individual's impairment(s) meet or equal the severity 
of an impairment listed in appendix 1 of subpart P of part 404 of our 
regulations? If so, and the duration requirement is met, we find that 
he or she is disabled. If not, we proceed to step 4 of the sequence.
    4. Does the individual's impairment(s) prevent him or her from 
doing his or her past relevant work, considering his or her residual 
functional capacity (RFC)? If not, we find that he or she is not 
disabled. If so, we proceed to step 5 of the sequence.
    5. Does the individual's impairment(s) prevent him or her from 
performing other work that exists in the national economy, considering 
his or her RFC together with the ``vocational factors'' of age, 
education, and work experience? If so, and if the duration requirement 
is met, we find that the individual is disabled. If not, we find that 
he or she is not disabled.
    As discussed in Secs. 404.1569 and 416.969, at step 5 of the 
sequential evaluation process we use the medical-vocational rules that 
are set out in appendix 2 of subpart P of part 404. (By reference, 
Sec. 416.969 provides that appendix 2 is also applicable to adults 
claiming SSI payments based on disability.) In general, the rules in 
appendix 2 take administrative notice of the existence of numerous, 
unskilled occupations at exertional levels defined in the regulations, 
such as ``sedentary,'' ``light,'' and ``medium.'' Based upon a 
consideration of an individual's RFC, age, education, and work 
experience, the rules either direct a conclusion as to whether an 
individual is disabled at step 5 of the sequential evaluation process 
or provide a framework for making a decision at this step. Some rules 
in appendix 2 also direct a conclusion when an individual has 
``skills'' acquired from previous skilled or semiskilled work that are 
``transferable'' to other skilled or semiskilled work.
    Our rules regarding age and skills are set out in Secs. 404.1563, 
404.1568, 416.963, and 416.968. The rules and explanatory text of 
appendix 2 of subpart P of part 404 also provide guidance for 
considering the vocational factors of age, education, and work 
experience that supplement the information on consideration of these 
vocational factors in Secs. 404.1560-404.1569a and 416.960-416.969a.
    Our revisions clarify a number of our rules on the consideration of 
one of the vocational factors, ``age,'' in Secs. 404.1563 and 416.963. 
They also clarify in final Secs. 404.1568(d)(4) and 416.968(d)(4) how 
we determine whether individuals who are of ``advanced age'' (i.e., age 
55 or older), including individuals in a subcategory of advanced age 
called ``closely approaching retirement age'' (i.e., age 60-64), have 
skills that are transferable to other work.

Explanation of Revisions

    For clarity, we refer to the changes in this notice as ``final'' 
rules and to the rules that will be changed by these final rules as the 
``current'' rules. However, it must be remembered that these final 
rules do not go into effect until 30 days after the date of this 
publication. Therefore, the ``current'' rules will still be in effect 
for another 30 days.

Sections 404.1563 and 416.963  Your Age as a Vocational Factor

    We are revising the first sentence of paragraph (a) of 
Secs. 404.1563 and

[[Page 17995]]

416.963, ``General,'' to state more clearly that ``age'' means 
chronological age. We are doing this because there has been some 
misunderstanding about how we consider the vocational factor of ``age'' 
at step 5 of the sequential evaluation process. In current paragraph 
(a) we state, in part, that ``Age refers to how old you are (your 
chronological age) * * *.'' We use an individual's chronological age 
when we use the medical-vocational guidelines in appendix 2 to decide 
whether the individual can do other work. We do this because we built 
consideration of chronological age and its impact on an individual's 
ability to make an adjustment to other work into the medical-vocational 
guidelines in appendix 2. These guidelines also consider the person's 
education and work experience, as well as the person's physical and 
mental functioning (i.e., RFC).
    In addition to defining ``age'' as how old you are (your 
chronological age), the first sentence of paragraph (a) of current 
Secs. 404.1563 and 416.963 explains that ``age'' refers to the extent 
to which age affects an individual's ability to adapt to a new work 
situation and ``to do work in competition with others.'' We are 
incorporating the principle intended in this statement into a new third 
sentence that clarifies our intent, as explained below.
    The second sentence of paragraph (a) of final Secs. 404.1563 and 
416.963 combines the second and third sentences of current paragraph 
(a). It clarifies our intent that, when we decide whether a person is 
disabled, we will not consider the person's age alone, but will 
consider his or her RFC, education, and work experience together with 
age.
    The third sentence of paragraph (a) of final Secs. 404.1563 and 
416.963 explains that, when we consider the vocational factor of 
``age'' in determining an individual's ability to adjust to other work, 
we consider advancing age to be an increasingly limiting factor in the 
ability to make such an adjustment.
    The third sentence of paragraph (a) of final Secs. 404.1563 and 
416.963, incorporates the rule we intended in the first sentence of 
current Secs. 404.1563(a) and 416.963(a), indicating that we consider 
the effects of age on an individual's ability ``to do work in 
competition with others.'' Some United States Courts of Appeals have 
interpreted this provision of the current rules, together with a 
provision regarding skills that are ``highly marketable'' in current 
Secs. 404.1563(d) and 416.963(d) that we are replacing, to support 
holdings that our regulations provide for consideration of an 
individual's employability. This is contrary to our intent. The circuit 
courts in these cases did not hold that their conclusions were required 
by the Act, which prohibits consideration of whether an individual 
would be hired if he or she applied for work. See sections 223(d)(2) 
and 1614(a)(3)(B) of the Act. Rather, the courts relied on the language 
in the provisions of our regulations in current Secs. 404.1563(a) and 
(d) and 416.963(a) and (d). The changes to the regulations provided in 
these final rules are, therefore, necessary to clarify our intent in 
this area.
    In the fourth sentence of Secs. 404.1563(a) and 416.963(a) of the 
proposed rules, we had proposed replacing the current rules' reference 
to the ability to ``do a significant number of jobs which exist in the 
national economy'' with a reference to ``the ability to do substantial 
gainful activity.'' We proposed this change to better reflect the 
definition of disability in the Act. In response to a comment we 
received on the proposed rules in which the commenter expressed the 
view that our proposed fourth sentence of paragraph (a) seemed 
inconsistent with the intent of our revisions to Secs. 404.1563 and 
416.963, we are revising that sentence in the final rules to read: ``If 
you are unemployed, but you still have the ability to adjust to other 
work, we will find that you are not disabled.''
    The fifth sentence of final Secs. 404.1563(a) and 416.963(a) is 
similar to the fifth sentence of current Secs. 404.1563(a) and 
416.963(a).
    We are moving the last sentence of paragraph (a) of Secs. 404.1563 
and 416.963 of the current rules to final Secs. 404.1563(b) and 
416.963(b). This sentence explains that we will not apply the age 
categories mechanically in a borderline situation. We believe the 
sentence fits more logically with the provisions in new paragraph (b) 
of the final rules, which explains more fully how we apply the age 
categories.
    We are adding a new paragraph (b), entitled ``How we apply the age 
categories,'' to Secs. 404.1563 and 416.963. The new paragraph explains 
that, if a person's age category changes during the period for which we 
are adjudicating a disability claim, we will use each of the age 
categories that is applicable to the person during the period for which 
we are deciding if the person is disabled. We also explain that in 
borderline age situations, we will not apply the age categories 
mechanically. We explain that a ``borderline'' situation means that the 
individual is ``within a few days to a few months'' of reaching a 
higher age category. This is consistent with our current policy 
interpretation in Social Security Ruling 83-10, ``Titles II and XVI: 
Determining Capability To Do Other Work--The Medical-Vocational Rules 
of Appendix 2,'' Social Security Rulings (C.E. 1983, p. 174). As we 
explain in that Social Security Ruling, we are unable to provide 
``fixed'' guidelines since such guidelines themselves would reflect a 
mechanical approach. (See Social Security Ruling 83-10, ibid., p. 182.)
    In response to commenters' requests to clarify the provisions of 
the proposed rules concerning borderline age, we are changing the last 
sentence of paragraph (b) in final Secs. 404.1563 and 416.963 to 
explain that ``If you are within a few days to a few months of reaching 
an older age category, and using the older age category would result in 
a determination or decision that you are disabled, we will consider 
whether to use the older age category after evaluating the overall 
impact of all the factors of your case.''
    Because we are including a new paragraph (b) in final 
Secs. 404.1563 and 416.963, we are redesignating the remaining 
paragraphs, i.e., paragraphs (b) through (e) of the current rules, as 
paragraphs (c) through (f) in the final rules.
    Paragraph (c) of final Sec. Sec. 404.1563 and 416.963, ``Younger 
person,'' incorporates the rules for individuals who have not yet 
attained age 50 that are in current Secs. 404.1563(b) and 416.963(b). 
The second sentence of current Secs. 404.1563(b) and 416.963(b) 
explains that in some circumstances ``we consider age 45 a handicap in 
adapting to a new work setting.'' The reference to ``age 45'' in this 
provision of the current rules is actually a reference to individuals 
who are age 45 through 49, because the category ``younger person'' ends 
upon attainment of age 50. We state this meaning plainly in the final 
rules by changing ``age 45'' to ``age 45-49.'' We are also revising the 
second sentence to remove the word ``handicap,'' to make the language 
of paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of the final rules consistent and to 
clarify our intent; i.e., to discuss the effects of age on the ability 
to make an adjustment to other work.
    Paragraph (d) of final Secs. 404.1563 and 416.963, ``Person closely 
approaching advanced age,'' incorporates the rules for individuals age 
50 through 54 that are in current Secs. 404.1563(c) and 416.963(c). We 
are adding the word ``closely'' to the heading of this paragraph for 
consistency with the text of the paragraph. We are replacing the phrase 
at the end of the sentence in the current rule, ``a significant number 
of jobs in the national economy,'' with the

[[Page 17996]]

phrase, ``other work,'' for consistency of language in the provisions 
of paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of final Secs. 404.1563 and 416.963. 
This is not intended to be a change in the standard, only a change for 
consistency among these provisions of the regulations.
    Paragraph (e) of final Secs. 404.1563 and 416.963, ``Person of 
advanced age,'' incorporates the rules for individuals age 55 or older 
that are in the first sentence of current Secs. 404.1563(d) and 
416.963(d). As in the preceding paragraphs, we are replacing the 
phrase, ``ability to do substantial gainful activity,'' in the first 
sentence of the current rules with the phrase ``ability to adjust to 
other work,'' so that paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of Secs. 404.1563 
and 416.963 will contain consistent language.
    The first sentence of paragraph (e) of final Secs. 404.1563 and 
416.963 reflects a change from the proposed rules. In the final rules, 
we use the term ``age'' instead of ``chronological age'' which was used 
in paragraph (e) of the proposed rules. Paragraph (a) of final 
Secs. 404.1563 and 416.963 states that, `` `Age' means your 
chronological age.'' It is unnecessary, therefore, to specify 
``chronological age'' in the provisions of paragraph (e). This change 
from the proposed rules also will make the references to ``age'' in 
paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) consistent.
    We are revising the second and third sentences of current 
Secs. 404.1563(d) and 416.963(d) and moving these provisions to final 
Secs. 404.1568(d)(4) and 416.968(d)(4). We explain these changes below, 
under the explanation of Secs. 404.1568(d)(4) and 416.968(d)(4). We are 
including in Secs. 404.1563(e) and 416.963(e) an appropriate cross-
reference to Sec. 404.1568(d)(4) or Sec. 416.968(d)(4) to make it 
easier to find the provisions in their new location.

Sections 404.1568 and 416.968  Skill  Requirements

    We are adding new Secs. 404.1568(d)(4) and 416.968(d)(4), 
``Transferability of skills for individuals of advanced age,'' to our 
final regulations addressing skills and their transferability. This 
paragraph incorporates and clarifies the provisions in the second and 
third sentences of current Secs. 404.1563(d) and 416.963(d). In the 
current regulations, these sentences provide rules regarding skills and 
their transferability for individuals of ``advanced age'' (i.e., age 55 
or older) who have the RFC for no more than ``sedentary'' work, and for 
individuals who are ``closely approaching retirement age'' (i.e., age 
60-64) who have the RFC for no more than ``light'' work. We believe 
that these provisions more logically belong in the sections of our 
regulations that discuss our rules regarding skills and their 
transferability; i.e., Secs. 404.1568 and 416.968. We are revising 
these provisions to clarify our intent, to make their language 
consistent with current provisions in our regulations, and to be 
consistent with other provisions in these final rules.
    The second sentence of current Secs. 404.1563(d) and 416.963(d) 
states that if a person of advanced age has a severe impairment(s) and 
cannot do medium work (i.e., the person is limited to light or 
sedentary work), the person may not be able to work unless he or she 
has transferable skills. We are incorporating this provision in the 
first sentence of final Secs. 404.1568(d)(4) and 416.968(d)(4).
    The first sentence of final Secs. 404.1568(d)(4) and 416.968(d)(4) 
describes a standard that applies to a person who is of advanced age 
(age 55 or older) and has a severe impairment(s) that limits him or her 
to sedentary or light work. For such a person, we state that, ``we will 
find that you cannot make an adjustment to other work unless you have 
skills that you can transfer to other skilled or semiskilled work (or 
you have recently completed education which provides for direct entry 
into skilled work) that you can do despite your impairment(s).'' This 
provision of the final rules differs from the provision of the proposed 
rules which stated that, for such a person, ``we will find that you 
cannot make an adjustment to other work unless you have skills that you 
can use in (transfer to) other skilled or semiskilled work that you can 
do despite your impairment(s).'' While the standard described in the 
proposed rules would apply in most circumstances, it is not a 
completely accurate statement of our rules concerning when we will find 
that a person who is of advanced age and limited to sedentary or light 
work is unable to make an adjustment to other work; i.e., is disabled. 
Our rules in appendix 2 to subpart P of part 404 of our regulations, 
the medical-vocational guidelines, provide that if such a person does 
not have transferable skills, a finding of disability is warranted 
unless the person has recently completed education which provides for 
direct entry into skilled work within his or her RFC. See 
Sec. 201.00(d) and rules 201.05, 201.08, 202.05 and 202.08 of appendix 
2. Accordingly, we are modifying the first sentence of Secs. 404.1568 
(d)(4) and 416.968 (d)(4) in these final rules to reflect our rules in 
appendix 2.
    We are incorporating in final Secs. 404.1568(d)(4) and 
416.968(d)(4) provisions from Secs. 201.00(f) and 202.00(f) of appendix 
2 to subpart P of part 404 of our regulations. This will clarify our 
original intent regarding the last sentence of current 
Secs. 404.1563(d) and 416.963(d) and will provide consistency in our 
rules. The revisions explain that, for an individual of advanced age 
(i.e., age 55 or older) whose RFC permits him or her to do no more than 
sedentary work, we will find that such individual's skills are 
transferable to skilled or semiskilled sedentary work only if the 
sedentary work is so similar to the individual's previous work that the 
individual would need to make ``very little, if any, vocational 
adjustment in terms of tools, work processes, work settings, or the 
industry.'' In addition, we are including in final Secs. 404.1568(d)(4) 
and 416.968(d)(4) a provision to clarify how we consider the 
transferability of skills for a person who is of advanced age but has 
not attained age 60 (i.e., a person age 55-59) and who has a severe 
impairment(s) that limits him or her to no more than light work. We 
explain that for such a person we will apply the rules in paragraphs 
(d)(1) through (d)(3) of current Secs. 404.1568 and 416.968 to 
determine if the person has skills that are transferable to skilled or 
semiskilled light work. The revisions also explain that, for an 
individual of advanced age who is ``closely approaching retirement 
age'' (i.e., age 60-64) and whose RFC permits him or her to do no more 
than light work, we will find that such individual's skills are 
transferable to skilled or semiskilled light work only if the light 
work is so similar to the individual's previous work that the 
individual would need to make ``very little, if any, vocational 
adjustment in terms of tools, work processes, work settings, or the 
industry.''
    In making these revisions, we are replacing the statement in 
current Secs. 404.1563(d) and 416.963(d), ``unless you have skills 
which are highly marketable,'' with the foregoing language taken from 
Secs. 201.00(f) and 202.00(f) of appendix 2. This will clarify our 
original intent that the provisions of current Secs. 404.1563(d) and 
416.963(d) are consistent with, and must be read in the context of, the 
provisions of Secs. 201.00(f) and 202.00(f) of appendix 2.
    There is no reference to ``highly marketable'' skills in the Act, 
which prohibits consideration of whether an individual would be hired 
if he or she applied for work. (See sections 223(d)(2) and 
1614(a)(3)(B) of the Act.) The phrase was one of the additions we made 
to the regulations under the ``common sense'' recodification in 1980. 
(See 45 FR 55566, August 20, 1980.) When we issued those regulations, 
we

[[Page 17997]]

did not intend to introduce the term as a statement of a new rule or as 
a change in existing rules. We intended only to contribute to public 
understanding of the provisions regarding transferability of skills for 
older workers in the medical-vocational guidelines in appendix 2. (The 
language in appendix 2 was not changed by the ``common sense'' 
recodification in 1980.) However, by using different language in 
current Secs. 404.1563(d) and 416.963(d) from that in appendix 2, we 
have inadvertently given the mistaken impression that we meant to 
establish a separate criterion for these individuals beyond what we 
already provide in appendix 2. That was not our intent. (See, e.g., 
Social Security Ruling 82-41,''Titles II and XVI: Work Skills and Their 
Transferability As Intended By the Expanded Vocational Factors 
Regulations Effective February 26, 1979,'' Social Security Rulings 
(C.E. 1982, pp. 196, 202); Final Rules for Adjudicating Disability 
Claims in Which Vocational Factors Must Be Considered, 43 FR 55349, 
55353-55354 (November 28, 1978).)
    Public Comments: We published these regulatory provisions in the 
Federal Register as a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on August 4, 
1999 (64 FR 42310). We provided the public a 60-day comment period. The 
comment period closed on October 4, 1999. We received 55 letters in 
response to the proposed rules. We received letters from disabled 
persons, attorneys, legal services organizations that represent the 
interests of disabled persons, and other interested parties. Four of 
the letters supported our proposed changes. The rest provided comments. 
A summary of the comments we received and our responses to the comments 
are set out below.
    Because many comments were detailed, we have condensed, summarized, 
or paraphrased them. We have, however, tried to summarize each 
commenter's views accurately and to respond to all of the significant 
issues raised by commenters that are within the scope of the proposed 
rules.
    Comment: Fifteen commenters believed that with increasing age, it 
becomes more difficult for individuals to adjust to other work. The 
commenters believed that a ``highly marketable'' skills standard is 
fair because it acknowledges that increased difficulty. One commenter 
stated that, ``An individual, age 60, may not be able to adapt to a new 
situation unless the individual has skills so specialized or unique as 
to offset the disadvantage of advancing age.'' One commenter noted that 
removal of the ``highly marketable'' provision would mean that 
individuals having a sedentary RFC would have no different standard at 
ages 55-59 than at ages 60-64.
    Response: Consistent with the statutory definition of disability, 
our regulations reflect that advancing age is an increasingly limiting 
factor in an individual's ability to adjust to other work.
    This concept is reflected in current Secs. 404.1563 and 416.963, 
and in final Secs. 404.1563, 404.1568(d)(4), 416.963 and 416.968(d)(4). 
The concept is built into the rules in the medical-vocational 
guidelines in appendix 2. The medical-vocational guidelines consider 
the impact of an individual's age, together with his or her RFC, 
education, and work experience, on his or her ability to make an 
adjustment to other work.
    With advancing age, it becomes increasingly more difficult for an 
individual to make an adjustment to other work. Our regulations 
recognize this by providing, among other things, for a more restrictive 
standard for determining transferability of skills for individuals of 
advanced age (age 55 or older) who can do no more than sedentary work 
and for individuals closely approaching retirement age (age 60-64) who 
can do no more than light work. Thus, the medical-vocational 
guidelines, as well as Sec. Sec. 404.1568(d)(4) and 416.968(d)(4) of 
the final rules, provide that for skills to be transferable to 
sedentary work for individuals who are age 55-64 or to light work for 
individuals who are age 60-64 there must be very little, if any, 
vocational adjustment required in terms of tools, work processes, work 
settings, or the industry.
    This standard for determining transferability of skills for 
individuals of advanced age considers the combined effects of advancing 
age and a restrictive RFC on an individual's ability to adjust to other 
work. It provides that, with advancing age (even when combined with a 
progressively less restrictive RFC, i.e., for individuals age 60-64), 
past relevant work skills must fit more closely with the skill 
requirements of the other work that is within the individual's RFC in 
order to find that the individual's skills are transferable to such 
work. For individuals with acquired work skills, we believe that this 
standard gives appropriate consideration to the effect of increasing 
age, in combination with an individual's RFC, on an individual's 
ability to make an adjustment to other work. We do not agree that, as 
an individual becomes older, there must be a greater degree of 
specialized or unique skills in order for an individual with past 
relevant work skills to be able to adjust to other work.
    We do not agree with the commenters that we must provide a 
distinction in our rules for individuals age 60-64 and individuals age 
55-59 who are limited to sedentary exertion in the same way that we 
have for individuals who are able to do light exertion. We believe that 
our standard for transferability of skills, that is, that there be 
``very little, if any, vocational adjustment in terms of tools, work 
processes, work settings, or the industry,'' is an appropriately narrow 
rule for individuals in the age groups affected. The only rule that 
could be narrower would be one that requires no vocational adjustment 
in terms of tools, work processes, work settings, or the industry, but 
such a standard would have virtually no applicability. By extending our 
narrow standard for transferability of skills to an individual age 55-
59 when the individual is limited to sedentary work, we are merely 
recognizing the very severe limitations and the serious impact on the 
ability to adjust to other work that an RFC limited to ``sedentary'' 
exertion imposes for all individuals of advanced age. Moreover, we 
could not use the standard of ``highly marketable'' skills as the 
commenters understand it for the reasons we have already given earlier 
in the preamble.
    Comment: Eleven commenters indicated that the provision in the 
regulations that refers to highly marketable skills had been in effect 
for at least 20 years without controversy. The commenters believed that 
to remove the reference to ``highly marketable'' from the regulations 
now would be unfair and would have a severe negative impact on 
individuals over the age of 60 who apply for Social Security disability 
benefits. One commenter found it difficult to believe that regulations 
that have been in place for almost two decades have inadvertently 
created a ``highly marketable'' standard that we did not intend.
    Response: We believe that having different interpretations of our 
regulations in a small number of circuits is unfair to individuals who 
file for disability benefits. It is not true that the terminology has 
not raised controversy in the past. Even though the issue of 
transferability of skills for individuals age 60-64 who can do no more 
than light work arises in only a small number of claims, there have 
been a number of court cases centering around the issue of the meaning 
of ``highly marketable'' skills, especially in recent years. This is 
why we decided that we needed to clarify the regulations to restore 
national

[[Page 17998]]

uniformity and to clarify what we have always meant by this rule.
    We do not agree that removal of the language ``highly marketable'' 
skills will have a severe, negative impact on individuals over the age 
of 60 who apply for Social Security disability benefits. Our rules for 
determining disability take into account a reduced ability to adapt to 
other work as an individual ages. Our rules for individuals age 60-64 
recognize that individuals in this age group may have greater 
difficulty in making an adjustment to other work than individuals under 
age 60. In order to find that an individual age 60-64 possesses skills 
that are transferable to either sedentary or light work, there must be 
very little, if any, adjustment required in terms of tools, work 
processes, work settings, or the industry. This is an appropriately 
narrow definition of transferability and requires that other work must 
be very similar to an individual's past work in order to find an 
ability to adjust to other work.
    In response to the last comment, we first published the rules 
establishing the standards for transferability in 1978 (43 FR 55349, 
November 28, 1978). Those rules did not include the phrase ``highly 
marketable'' skills. When we published the ``Operation Common Sense'' 
revisions of our disability regulations in 1980, we indicated that our 
goals were primarily to rewrite the disability regulations to make them 
easier to read and understand. We also indicated that there were some 
standards that we were including in the regulations for the first time, 
and provided a list of those new provisions. For the new provisions in 
Sec. Sec. 404.1563 and 416.963, we made no reference to the insertion 
of the language on highly marketable skills, a clear indication that 
the new language was not intended to be a change in our standard. Our 
intent is, and always has been, what we provided in Sec. 202.00(f) of 
appendix 2 in 1978 and continue to provide in the same section.
    Comment: Eight commenters stated that realities of employment in 
the United States economy are such that older workers cannot compete in 
the workforce. One commenter stated that at issue is not how 
competitive older workers are, but how valuable their skill set is to 
the job market. One commenter did not believe that older individuals 
could adapt to the technological changes in the marketplace. One 
commenter indicated that many individuals have been offered ``early 
out'' agreements with their companies beginning at age 50. The 
commenter viewed this as an indication that older workers cannot 
compete in the marketplace. A commenter observed that age-related 
health insurance costs to an employer discourage hiring of older 
workers. One commenter indicated that because some states have enacted 
early retirement programs for individuals over age 50, this is further 
proof that age makes it much more difficult to obtain employment. One 
commenter stated that employers discriminate against disabled 
individuals and older individuals. The commenter believed that 
disabled, older individuals are doubly discriminated against. One 
commenter stated that we must factor into our disability analysis that 
an older worker in a skilled trade cannot transfer to a lower paying 
job without violating union collective bargaining agreements.
    Response: The Act precludes our consideration of such factors as 
the inability to get work, the condition of the job market, the hiring 
practices of employers, the existence of job vacancies, or the types of 
job openings. In applying the definition of disability under the Act at 
the last step of our sequential evaluation process, we consider whether 
an individual whose impairment(s) prevents the individual from 
performing his or her past relevant work, has the ability to do other 
work, considering his or her RFC, age, education and work experience. 
The Act requires that we consider the factors of age, education, and 
work experience, together with the severity of the individual's 
impairment(s) (RFC), in determining whether the individual is able to 
do ``any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the 
national economy,'' without regard to ``whether such work exists in the 
immediate area in which he lives, or whether a specific job vacancy 
exists for him, or whether he would be hired if he applied for work.'' 
Sections 223(d)(2) and 1614(a)(3)(B) of the Act. These sections of the 
Act state that work exists in the national economy if it ``exists in 
significant numbers either in the region where such individual lives or 
in several regions of the country.''
    Consistent with the provisions of the Act, we consider the 
vocational factors of age, education, and work experience, together 
with an individual's RFC, in determining whether an individual has the 
ability to make an adjustment to other work. Thus, 
Sec. Sec. 404.1566(c) and 416.966(c) provide:

    We will determine that you are not disabled if your residual 
functional capacity and vocational abilities make it possible for 
you to do work which exists in the national economy, but you remain 
unemployed because of--
    (1) Your inability to get work;
    (2) Lack of work in your local area;
    (3) The hiring practices of employers;
    (4) Technological changes in the industry in which you have 
worked;
    (5) Cyclical economic conditions;
    (6) No job openings for you;
    (7) You would not actually be hired to do work you could 
otherwise do; or
    (8) You do not wish to do a particular type of work.

    Comment: Two commenters suggested that, if we remove the ``highly 
marketable'' language in Secs. 404.1563(d) and 416.963(d), we should 
change our explanation for transferable skills for individuals age 60-
64 having an RFC for sedentary or light work. The commenters suggested 
that we change the standard to ``In order to find transferability of 
skills to skilled sedentary or light work for individuals close to 
retirement age (60-64), there must be no vocational adjustment required 
in terms of tools, work processes, work settings or the industry.''
    Response: As we have already noted, we believe that our current 
language expresses an appropriate standard to account for the reduction 
in the ability of an individual age 60-64 to adjust to other sedentary 
or light work. ``Very little, if any, vocational adjustment'' is an 
appropriately narrow standard.
    Comment: Four commenters had concerns that our proposed changes 
were inconsistent with the decisions of the courts and inconsistent 
with our decision to acquiesce in court of appeals' decisions in three 
circuits.
    Response: As we noted in the preamble to the NPRM, ``the circuit 
courts in these cases did not hold that their conclusions were required 
by the Act, which prohibits consideration of whether an individual 
would be hired if he or she applied for work. * * * Rather, the courts 
relied on the language in [the current] provisions of our 
regulations.'' (64 FR 42312) Therefore, in all three of our 
acquiescence rulings, we stated our intent to clarify the regulations 
at issue through the rulemaking process and to rescind these 
acquiescence rulings once we revised the regulations. Accordingly, 
because these final rules revise the regulations that were the subject 
of the circuit courts' holdings, we are publishing a notice in this 
issue of the Federal Register rescinding the acquiescence rulings 
effective as of the date the revised regulations go into effect. See 
Secs. 404.985(e)(4) and 416.1485(e)(4) of our regulations.
    Comment: Three commenters requested that we clarify our concept and 
definition of borderline age in proposed Secs. 404.1563(b) and 
416.963(b).

[[Page 17999]]

These commenters believe that ``a few days to a few months'' is too 
vague an explanation of borderline age to provide much guidance to 
adjudicators on this issue.
    Response: As we explain earlier in this preamble and in the 
preamble to the NPRM, the description of a ``borderline'' situation as 
one in which the individual is ``within a few days to a few months'' of 
reaching a higher age category is consistent with our current policy 
interpretation in Social Security Ruling 83-10. As we explain in that 
Social Security Ruling, we are unable to provide ``fixed'' guidelines 
since such guidelines themselves would reflect a mechanical approach to 
the application of the age categories. However, we are changing the 
final sentence of Secs. 404.1563(b) and 416.963(b) to explain that we 
must consider all of the factors of each case before deciding whether 
to use an older age category for our decision. We are considering 
whether there is a need to provide additional guidance on how the 
factors of each case should be considered in determining whether to 
apply a higher age category and may issue guidance in the future.
    Comment: Four commenters expressed concern about our proposal to 
use the term ``other work'' in place of the phrases ``a significant 
number of jobs which exist in the national economy,'' and ``jobs which 
exist in significant numbers in the national economy'' which are in the 
provisions of current paragraphs (b), (c), and (d), of Secs. 404.1563 
and 416.963. The commenters were concerned that the proposed change 
might result in a misunderstanding as to what is meant by ``other 
work.'' They believed that it is important to stress that ``other 
work'' refers to jobs that are at the SGA level and that exist in 
significant numbers in the national economy.
    Response: In these final rules, we use the term ``other work'' in 
place of the various phrases that are used in the current rules to 
refer to work which exists in the national economy. We are making this 
change to ensure that the terminology we use to describe such work is 
consistent throughout these final regulations. The change is also 
consistent with the language of other sections of our regulations in 
which we use the term ``other work.'' See, e.g., Secs. 404.1505(a), 
404.1520(f)(1), 404.1560(c), 404.1561, 416.905(a), 416.920(f)(1), 
416.960(c) and 416.961.
    We explain the meaning of ``other work'' in Secs. 404.1560(c) and 
416.960(c). These sections state that, ``[b]y other work we mean jobs 
that exist in significant numbers in the national economy.'' In 
addition, Secs. 404.1505(a) and 416.905(a), which describe the basic 
definition of disability for adults (including persons claiming child's 
insurance benefits based on disability under title II), indicate that 
``any other work'' refers to ``any other substantial gainful activity 
which exists in the national economy.''
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the sentence ``If you are 
unemployed because of your age, but you still have the ability to do 
substantial gainful activity, we will find that you are not disabled'' 
(in proposed Secs. 404.1563(a) and 416.963(a)) seemed inconsistent with 
the intent of the revisions, which was to clarify that ``employability 
and marketability'' are not considered in establishing disability. The 
commenter observed that the proposed rules provided no explanation of 
how we would determine if a person is unemployed because of his or her 
age. The commenter believed that the proposed provision is also 
inconsistent with the other sections that use the phrase ``ability to 
adjust to other work.'' The commenter suggested that we change the 
sentence to read, ``If you are unemployed but you still have the 
ability to adjust to other work, we will find that you are not 
disabled.''
    Response: We adopted the comment.
    Comment: One commenter believed that the legislative history 
leading up to the ``common sense'' recodification of our disability 
regulations in 1980 supported a more liberal definition of disability. 
The commenter stated that the ``highly marketable'' skills language is 
consistent with a more liberal definition of disability.
    Response: The purpose of our ``common sense'' rewrite of the 
disability regulations in 1980 was to make our regulations easier to 
read and understand. There was no intent to liberalize or change the 
meaning of our regulations for determining whether an individual who is 
age 60-64, possesses work skills, and is limited to sedentary or light 
work, can make an adjustment to other work.
    Comment: One commenter agreed with our proposed changes, but 
suggested that we include a dollar level amount for SGA.
    Response: These final rules, like the proposed rules, clarify our 
consideration of age as a vocational factor at the last step of the 
sequential evaluation process for determining disability. Our rules for 
determining when earnings demonstrate an ability to do SGA are in 
Secs. 404.1574 and 416.974. Effective July 1, 1999, we increased the 
average monthly earnings guidelines for determining whether work done 
by an employee is SGA from $500 to $700 per month. See 64 FR 18566, 
April 15, 1999.
    Comment: One commenter disagreed with the principle in our rules 
that age affects ability to adapt to other work. The commenter stated 
that many studies have shown that productivity does not decline with 
age, workers age 55 and over account for only 9.7 percent of workplace 
injuries, and that intelligence remains constant until age 70. The 
commenter stated that workers 50 and over tend to have better job 
attendance records, and greater job commitment than younger workers. 
The commenter believed that our wording bolsters the erroneous 
attitudes of many employers who see workers age 50 and over as unable 
to learn, adapt and be productive and might convince a certain segment 
of the population that as they age they can no longer learn new skills 
nor contribute to society in a meaningful, productive way.
    Response: As we explain earlier in this preamble, the Act requires 
us to consider an individual's age, education, and work experience, 
together with the severity of his or her impairment(s), in determining 
whether the individual is disabled.
    Comment: Two individuals pointed out that for some impairments, age 
is not the most critical factor in disability. They suggested that we 
incorporate language into the regulations to explain that younger 
individuals can become disabled and may qualify for disability benefits 
as a result.
    Response: Our existing regulations include rules for deciding that 
an individual is disabled based on medical considerations alone. See, 
e.g., Sec. Sec. 404.1525 and 416.925. The final regulations clarify our 
rules on the consideration of age as a vocational factor at the last 
step of the sequential evaluation process for determining disability. 
We consider the vocational factors of age, education, and work 
experience, together with an individual's RFC, only in cases in which a 
finding of disability cannot be made on the basis of medical 
considerations alone, and the individual is prevented from doing his or 
her previous work because of a severe impairment(s).
    Comment: One commenter stated that if someone has worked at a 
physically demanding job all of his or her life and cannot do that job 
anymore, age should not make a difference.
    Response: We have a special rule for determining disability for 
individuals who have a long work history of arduous, unskilled work and 
who can no longer do this work because of a severe impairment(s). This 
rule is

[[Page 18000]]

discussed in Sec. Sec. 404.1520(f)(2), 404.1562, 416.920(f)(2) and 
416.962.
    Comment: Two commenters indicated that they believed that our NPRM 
is part of a trend to deny more individuals disability benefits.
    Response: The purpose of our changes is to clarify the intent of 
our regulations and restore national uniformity to our procedures. The 
changes are not intended to tighten disability eligibility 
requirements.
    Comment: One commenter indicated that SSA should provide a payment 
supplement to those individuals who experience reduced earning power as 
a result of the aging process.
    Response: This is beyond the scope of our NPRM and the Act. We pay 
the benefits that the Act authorizes.
    Comment: One commenter indicated that the disability appeals 
process takes far too long and believed that the disability rules 
should be applied uniformly from State to State.
    Response: The length of the appeals process is outside the scope of 
the proposed rules and these final rules. We believe that the changes 
we are making will restore national uniformity in how age is applied as 
a vocational factor.

Regulatory Procedures

Executive Order 12866

    We have consulted with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
and determined that these rules do not meet the criteria for a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866. Thus, 
they were not subject to OMB review. We have also determined that these 
rules meet the plain language requirement of E.O. 12866 and the 
President's memorandum of June 1, 1998.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    We certify that these regulations will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they 
affect only individuals. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis 
as provided in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, is not 
required.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    These regulations impose no additional reporting or recordkeeping 
requirements subject to OMB clearance.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 96.001, Social 
Security-Disability Insurance; 96.002 Social Security-Retirement 
Insurance; 96.004, Social Security-Survivors Insurance; 96.006, 
Supplemental Security Income.)

List of Subjects

20 CFR Part 404

    Administrative practice and procedure, Blind, Disability benefits, 
Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Social Security.

20 CFR Part 416

    Administrative practice and procedure, Aged, Blind, Disability 
benefits, Public assistance programs, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Supplemental Security Income (SSI).

    Dated: March 17, 2000.
Kenneth S. Apfel,
Commissioner of Social Security.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, subpart P of part 404 and 
subpart I of part 416 of 20 CFR chapter III are amended as set forth 
below:

PART 404--FEDERAL OLD-AGE, SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY INSURANCE 
(1950-  )

Subpart P--[Amended]

    1. The authority citation for subpart P of part 404 continues to 
read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 202, 205(a), (b), and (d)-(h), 216(i), 221(a) 
and (i), 222(c), 223, 225, and 702(a)(5) of the Social Security Act 
(42 U.S.C. 402, 405(a), (b), and (d)-(h), 416(i), 421(a) and (i), 
422(c), 423, 425, and 902(a)(5)); sec. 211(b), Pub. L. 104-193, 110 
Stat. 2105, 2189.

    2. Section 404.1563 is amended by:
    A. Revising paragraph (a),
    B. Redesignating paragraphs (b) through (e) as paragraphs (c) 
through (f),
    C. Adding a new paragraph (b), and
    D. Revising redesignated paragraphs (c), (d) and (e) to re ad as 
follows:


Sec. 404.1563  Your age as a vocational factor.

    (a) General. ``Age'' means your chronological age. When we decide 
whether you are disabled under Sec. 404.1520(f)(1), we will consider 
your chronological age in combination with your residual functional 
capacity, education, and work experience; we will not consider your 
ability to adjust to other work on the basis of your age alone. In 
determining the extent to which age affects a person's ability to 
adjust to other work, we consider advancing age to be an increasingly 
limiting factor in the person's ability to make such an adjustment, as 
we explain in paragraphs (c) through (e) of this section. If you are 
unemployed but you still have the ability to adjust to other work, we 
will find that you are not disabled. In paragraphs (b) through (e) of 
this section and in appendix 2 to this subpart, we explain in more 
detail how we consider your age as a vocational factor.
    (b) How we apply the age categories. When we make a finding about 
your ability to do other work under Sec. 404.1520(f)(1), we will use 
the age categories in paragraphs (c) through (e) of this section. We 
will use each of the age categories that applies to you during the 
period for which we must determine if you are disabled. We will not 
apply the age categories mechanically in a borderline situation. If you 
are within a few days to a few months of reaching an older age 
category, and using the older age category would result in a 
determination or decision that you are disabled, we will consider 
whether to use the older age category after evaluating the overall 
impact of all the factors of your case.
    (c) Younger person. If you are a younger person (under age 50), we 
generally do not consider that your age will seriously affect your 
ability to adjust to other work. However, in some circumstances, we 
consider that persons age 45-49 are more limited in their ability to 
adjust to other work than persons who have not attained age 45. See 
Rule 201.17 in appendix 2.
    (d) Person closely approaching advanced age. If you are closely 
approaching advanced age (age 50-54), we will consider that your age 
along with a severe impairment(s) and limited work experience may 
seriously affect your ability to adjust to other work.
    (e) Person of advanced age. We consider that at advanced age (age 
55 or older) age significantly affects a person's ability to adjust to 
other work. We have special rules for persons of advanced age and for 
persons in this category who are closely approaching retirement age 
(age 60-64). See Sec. 404.1568(d)(4).
* * * * *

    3. Section 404.1568 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d)(4) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 404.1568  Skill requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) Skills that can be used in other work (transferability). * * *
    (4) Transferability of skills for individuals of advanced age. If 
you are of advanced age (age 55 or older), and you have a severe 
impairment(s) that limits you to sedentary or light work, we will find 
that you cannot make an adjustment to other work unless you have skills 
that you can transfer to other skilled or semiskilled work (or you have 
recently completed education which provides for direct entry into 
skilled

[[Page 18001]]

work) that you can do despite your impairment(s). We will decide if you 
have transferable skills as follows. If you are of advanced age and you 
have a severe impairment(s) that limits you to no more than sedentary 
work, we will find that you have skills that are transferable to 
skilled or semiskilled sedentary work only if the sedentary work is so 
similar to your previous work that you would need to make very little, 
if any, vocational adjustment in terms of tools, work processes, work 
settings, or the industry. (See Sec. 404.1567(a) and Sec. 201.00(f) of 
appendix 2.) If you are of advanced age but have not attained age 60, 
and you have a severe impairment(s) that limits you to no more than 
light work, we will apply the rules in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(3) 
of this section to decide if you have skills that are transferable to 
skilled or semiskilled light work (see Sec. 404.1567(b)). If you are 
closely approaching retirement age (age 60-64) and you have a severe 
impairment(s) that limits you to no more than light work, we will find 
that you have skills that are transferable to skilled or semiskilled 
light work only if the light work is so similar to your previous work 
that you would need to make very little, if any, vocational adjustment 
in terms of tools, work processes, work settings, or the industry. (See 
Sec. 404.1567(b) and Rule 202.00(f) of appendix 2 to this subpart.)

PART 416--SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED, BLIND, AND 
DISABLED

Subpart I--[Amended]

    4. The authority citation for subpart I of part 416 continues to 
read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 702(a)(5), 1611, 1614, 1619, 1631(a), (c), and 
(d)(1), and 1633 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 902(a)(5), 
1382, 1382c, 1382h, 1383(a), (c), and (d)(1), and 1383b); secs. 4(c) 
and 5, 6(c)-(e), 14(a) and 15, Pub. L. 98-460, 98 Stat. 1794, 1801, 
1802, and 1808 (42 U.S.C. 421 note, 423 note, 1382h note).


    5. Section 416.963 is amended by:
    A. Revising paragraph (a),
    B. Redesignating paragraphs (b) through (e) as paragraphs (c) 
through (f),
    C. Adding a new paragraph (b), and
    D. Revising redesignated paragraphs (c), (d) and (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 416.963  Your age as a vocational factor.

    (a) General. ``Age'' means your chronological age. When we decide 
whether you are disabled under Sec. 416.920(f)(1), we will consider 
your chronological age in combination with your residual functional 
capacity, education, and work experience; we will not consider your 
ability to adjust to other work on the basis of your age alone. In 
determining the extent to which age affects a person's ability to 
adjust to other work, we consider advancing age to be an increasingly 
limiting factor in the person's ability to make such an adjustment, as 
we explain in paragraphs (c) through (e) of this section. If you are 
unemployed but you still have the ability to adjust to other work, we 
will find that you are not disabled. In paragraphs (b) through (e) of 
this section and in appendix 2 of subpart P of part 404 of this 
chapter, we explain in more detail how we consider your age as a 
vocational factor.
    (b) How we apply the age categories. When we make a finding about 
your ability to do other work under Sec. 416.920(f)(1), we will use the 
age categories in paragraphs (c) through (e) of this section. We will 
use each of the age categories that applies to you during the period 
for which we must determine if you are disabled. We will not apply the 
age categories mechanically in a borderline situation. If you are 
within a few days to a few months of reaching an older age category, 
and using the older age category would result in a determination or 
decision that you are disabled, we will consider whether to use the 
older age category after evaluating the overall impact of all the 
factors of your case.
    (c) Younger person. If you are a younger person (under age 50), we 
generally do not consider that your age will seriously affect your 
ability to adjust to other work. However, in some circumstances, we 
consider that persons age 45-49 are more limited in their ability to 
adjust to other work than persons who have not attained age 45. See 
Rule 201.17 in appendix 2 of subpart P of part 404 of this chapter.
    (d) Person closely approaching advanced age. If you are closely 
approaching advanced age (age 50-54), we will consider that your age 
along with a severe impairment(s) and limited work experience may 
seriously affect your ability to adjust to other work.
    (e) Person of advanced age. We consider that at advanced age (age 
55 or older) age significantly affects a person's ability to adjust to 
other work. We have special rules for persons of advanced age and for 
persons in this category who are closely approaching retirement age 
(age 60-64). See Sec. 416.968(d)(4).
* * * * *

    6. Section 416.968 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d)(4) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 416.968  Skill requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) Skills that can be used in other work (transferability). * * *
    (4) Transferability of skills for individuals of advanced age. If 
you are of advanced age (age 55 or older), and you have a severe 
impairment(s) that limits you to sedentary or light work, we will find 
that you cannot make an adjustment to other work unless you have skills 
that you can transfer to other skilled or semiskilled work (or you have 
recently completed education which provides for direct entry into 
skilled work) that you can do despite your impairment(s). We will 
decide if you have transferable skills as follows. If you are of 
advanced age and you have a severe impairment(s) that limits you to no 
more than sedentary work, we will find that you have skills that are 
transferable to skilled or semiskilled sedentary work only if the 
sedentary work is so similar to your previous work that you would need 
to make very little, if any, vocational adjustment in terms of tools, 
work processes, work settings, or the industry. (See Sec. 416.967(a) 
and Rule 201.00(f) of appendix 2 of subpart P of part 404 of this 
chapter.) If you are of advanced age but have not attained age 60, and 
you have a severe impairment(s) that limits you to no more than light 
work, we will apply the rules in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(3) of 
this section to decide if you have skills that are transferable to 
skilled or semiskilled light work (see Sec. 416.967(b)). If you are 
closely approaching retirement age (age 60-64) and you have a severe 
impairment(s) that limits you to no more than light work, we will find 
that you have skills that are transferable to skilled or semiskilled 
light work only if the light work is so similar to your previous work 
that you would need to make very little, if any, vocational adjustment 
in terms of tools, work processes, work settings, or the industry. (See 
Sec. 416.967(b) and Rule 202.00(f) of appendix 2 of subpart P of part 
404 of this chapter.)

[FR Doc. 00-8356 Filed 4-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191-02-U