[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 213 (Friday, November 4, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67101-67109]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21975]


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

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

20 CFR Parts 404 and 416

RIN 0960-AG29


Age as a Factor in Evaluating Disability

AGENCY: Social Security Administration.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: We are proposing to revise the definitions of the age 
categories we use as one of the criteria in determining disability 
under titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act (the Act). The 
proposed changes reflect our adjudicative experience, advances in 
medical treatment and healthcare, changes in the workforce since we 
originally published our rules for considering age in 1978, and current 
and future increases in the full retirement age under Social Security 
law. The proposed changes would not affect the rules under part 404 of 
our regulations for individuals age 55 or older who have statutory 
blindness. They also would not affect our other rules that are 
dependent on age, such as the age at which you can qualify for early 
retirement benefits or for Medicare as a retired individual.

DATES: To be sure that your comments are considered, we must receive 
them no later than January 3, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may give us your comments by: using our Internet site 
facility (i.e., Social Security Online) at http://policy.ssa.gov/erm/rules.nsf/Rules+Open+To+Comment or the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
http://www.regulations.gov; e-mail to [email protected]; telefax to 
(410) 966-2830, or letter to the Commissioner of Social Security, P.O. 
Box 17703, Baltimore, MD 21235-7703. You may also deliver them to the 
Office of Regulations, Social Security Administration, 100 Altmeyer 
Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235-6401, 
between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on regular business days. Comments are 
posted on our Internet site, or you may inspect them on regular 
business days by making arrangements with the contact person shown in 
this preamble.
    Electronic Version: The electronic file of this document is 
available on the date of publication in the Federal Register at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Augustine, Social Insurance 
Specialist, Office of Regulations, Social Security Administration, 6401 
Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235-6401. Call (410) 965-0020 or 
TTY 1-800-325-0778 for information about these proposed 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. You may also 
contact Social Security Online at http://www.socialsecurity.gov/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 67102]]

Why Are We Proposing To Revise the Definitions of the Age Categories We 
Use To Determine Disability?

    In 1978, we established age categories for evaluating disability. 
Although we indicated at that time that creating the age categories was 
a ``pioneering effort'' on our part, we have not revisited our 
standards for effectiveness or accounted for changes in public health 
in over 25 years.
    In response to significant changes in public health conditions, we 
have conducted an analysis of recent studies to determine what changes, 
if any, should be made to the current standards. We believe that it is 
now appropriate to redraw the lines established in 1978. Based on 
advances in medical treatment and healthcare, significant changes in 
the workforce, our adjudicative experience, and current and future 
increases in the full retirement age under Social Security law, we 
propose to revise our age categories by two years. This minimal 
increase is a reasonable adjustment to reflect public health factors 
which have had significant positive effects on the health of older 
workers and their ability to do other work.
    Advances in medical treatment and healthcare have provided longer 
life expectancies and more healthy years for millions of Americans. In 
1978, when we last published our rules, estimated life expectancy at 
birth was 73.5 years.\1\ A child born today is expected to live to at 
least 77 years of age.\2\ It is projected that life expectancy will 
continue to increase so that a child born in 2010 could be expected to 
live to be over 78 years of age.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Elizabeth Arias, United States Life Tables, 2002, National 
Vital Statistics Reports 53, no. 6 (Hyattsville, MD: National Center 
for Health Statistics, 2004), 33.
    \2\ Id.
    \3\ U.S. Census Bureau, ``Vital Statistics,'' Statistical 
Abstract of the United States: 2004-2005 (Washington, D.C.: 2005), 
71. Available from: http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/04statab/vitstat.pdf. Accessed 7 July 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Not only are Americans living longer, but there is clear and 
overwhelming evidence that the average health of the elderly population 
is improving. As in 1978, there is no conclusive data that relate 
specific chronological ages to specific vocational limitations for 
performing and adapting to new jobs. However, researchers agree that 
chronic disability is a sensitive measure of age-related changes in the 
health and biological fitness of individuals.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Kenneth G. Manton and others, ``Chronic Disability Trends in 
the U.S. Elderly Populations 1982 to 1994,'' Proceedings of the 
National Academy of Sciences 94, no. 6 (March 18, 1997): 2593. 
Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=9122240. Accessed 29 June 
2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Recent studies have concluded that adults over age 65 are reporting 
continuing and significant improvements in their ability to perform 
activities of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living, 
and functional limitations. These three measurements are considered 
effective measures of old-age disability by researchers.\5\ Three major 
surveys conducted within the last decade estimate that the average 
annual decline in disability among those over age 50 ranged from -1.55% 
to -0.92% per year during the 1990s.\6\ In their seminal work titled 
Changes in the Prevalence of Chronic Disability in the United States 
Black and non-Black Population Above Age 65 from 1982 to 1999, Kenneth 
G. Manton and XiLang Gu concluded that percentage declines in 
disability increased in each five-year period between 1982 and 1999.\7\ 
Additional studies, such as Health, United States, 2003 Special 
Excerpt: Trend Tables on 65 and Older Population published by the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services and Older Americans 2004: Key 
Indicators of Well-Being produced by the Federal Interagency Forum on 
Aging Related Statistics, report similar increases in reported 
functioning and overall health of those age 65 and over.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See generally Vicki A. Freedman and others, ``Recent Trends 
in Disability and Functioning among Older Adults in the United 
States: A Systematic Review,'' Journal of the American Medical 
Association 288, no. 24 (December 25, 2002).
    \6\ Ibid., 3144.
    \7\ Kenneth G. Manton and XiLiang Gu, ``Changes in the 
Prevalence of Chronic Disability in the United States Black and 
Nonblack Population above Age 65 from 1982-1999,'' Proceedings of 
the National Academy of Sciences 98, no. 11 (May 22, 2001): 6354-
6359. Available from: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/98/11/6354 cgi/content/full/98/11/
6354. Accessed 29 June 2005.
    \8\ U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health 
Statistics, Health, United States, 2003 Special Excerpt: Trend 
Tables on 65 and Older Population (Hyattsville, MD: U.S. Department 
of Health and Human Services, 2003). Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hus2003excerpt.pdf. Accessed 29 June 
2005; Federal Interagency Forum on Aging-Related Statistics, Older 
Americans 2004: Key Indicators of Well-Being (Hyattsville, MD: 
Government Printing Office, 2004). Available from: http://www.agingstats.gov/chartbook2004/OA_2004.pdf. Accessed 29 June 
2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Among adults over age 50, significant and consistent improvements 
have been reported with respect to functional limitations--defined as 
difficulty seeing words and letters in ordinary newspaper print, 
lifting and carrying 10 lbs, climbing a flight of stairs, and walking a 
quarter of a mile.\9\ The results of a 1998 study conducted by Vicki A. 
Freedman and Linda G. Martin concluded that ``the older population 
today is significantly different from that of just a decade ago.'' \10\ 
Functional limitations among those aged 50-64 improved by an average of 
2.325% between 1984 and 1993, when adjusted for a variety of social 
factors, and 2.975% unadjusted.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Vicki A. Freedman and Linda G. Martin, ``Understanding 
Trends in Functional Limitations among Older Americans,'' American 
Journal of Public Health 88, no. 10 (October, 1998): 1457.
    \10\ Ibid., 1460.
    \11\ Ibid., 1461.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This increase in healthy, active years has already translated into 
a shift among older adults who are working past 65. It has been 
projected that labor force participation for workers age 55-64 will 
increase by five percent for men and nine percent for women between 
2003 and 2012.\12\ As Charles Leven, Chair of the AARP Board of 
Directors, stated, ``People are showing us that it's possible to work 
well into their 80s and 90s with no thought of retirement. And people 
of advanced age are showing us they can go to school--to learn new 
skills, develop abilities, [or] to train for a new profession.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Christopher Reynolds, ``Boomers' 65 Will Be `The New 50': 
Fear Factor Enters Equation as the Prospect of Boomer Retirement Age 
Pops Up on the Horizon,'' Forecast, November 2003. Available from: 
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0GDE/is_11_23/ai_n6102019. Accessed June 2005.
    \13\ Charles Leven, Older Workers: Opportunity at Our Doorstep, 
speech delivered at the AARP Board of Directors meeting, Nikkei 
Senior Work-life Forum, Tokyo, Japan, September 2004. Available 
from: http://www.aarp.org/research/work/employment/a2004-09-22-leven-09-04.html. Accessed 29 June 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Economic and social changes have also increased opportunities for 
individuals with disabilities to participate in the workforce. In the 
25 years since these rules were originally published, the economy has 
shifted toward service and knowledge-based jobs that may allow for 
greater participation for some persons with physical limitations.\14\ 
Reports indicate that the percentage of workers in physically demanding 
jobs has dropped from about twenty percent in 1950 to less than eight 
percent in 1996.\15\ The

[[Page 67103]]

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, projects that job 
growth will occur in non-physically intensive occupations such as 
computer operators or service providers.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ General Accounting Office, ``Federal Disability Assistance: 
Wide Array of Programs Needs to be Examined in Light of 21st Century 
Challenges,'' Report to Congressional Committees (Washington, D.C.: 
General Accounting Office, June 2005), 4. Available from: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05626.pdf. Accessed 7 July 2005.
    \15\ Eugene Steuerle and others, ``Can Americans Work Longer?,'' 
Straight Talk on Social Security and Retirement Policy no. 5 
(Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, August 1999). Available from: 
http://www.urban.org/Template.cfm?NavMenuID=24&template=/TaggedContent/ViewPublication.cfm&PublicationID=6435. Accessed 29 
June 2005.
    \16\ U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 
Working in the 21st Century (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Labor). Available from: http://www.bls.gov/opub/working/home.htm. 
Accessed 7 July 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Congress has also acknowledged the challenges that these economic 
and social changes may create. Section 201 of the Social Security 
Amendments of 1983 provided for a gradual increase in the age of 
eligibility for full retirement benefits from age 65 to age 67. This 
increase is being phased in over a period of 22 years. The full 
retirement age will be 66 in 2009 and 67 in 2027. These projections 
include a 10 year hiatus, during which there will be no increase in the 
full retirement age.
    Shortly after the 1983 Amendments, Congress passed the Age 
Discrimination Act of 1986 banning mandatory retirement. Congress also 
enacted the Senior Citizens' Freedom to Work Act of 2000. Section 4 of 
this Act allows individuals who have attained full retirement age to 
voluntarily suspend those benefits in order to earn delayed retirement 
credits.
    Clearly, Congress has acknowledged that it is both reasonable and 
necessary for people to work longer before retiring. At the same time, 
Congress has not made policy decisions with respect to age and its 
relationship to the determination of disability. Instead, Congress left 
the details of factoring age into the determination of disability to 
us, with the exception of statutory blindness.
    Our own adjudicative experience suggests that the current rules 
should be revised to more accurately reflect the ages at which 
adjustment to other work becomes increasingly difficult. Since 1978, we 
have made millions of determinations and decisions at step five of the 
sequential evaluation process. It appears that there are many jobs that 
individuals, despite their age, are capable of performing and adjusting 
to, even though they have not done those jobs previously. It is 
appropriate for our rules to be adjusted to reflect these changing 
conditions.
    For example, under Sec. Sec.  404.1567(b) and 416.967(b) of our 
regulations and other policy instructions, individuals who can do 
``light'' work are able to, among other things, stand and walk for most 
of an eight hour workday, lift and carry up to 20 pounds occasionally 
and 10 pounds frequently, and use their arms and hands for reaching, 
pushing, pulling, and manipulation with little or no limitation; they 
can generally do all of the tasks associated with sedentary work as 
well. Our rules in Table No. 2, Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2, of the 
Medical-Vocational Guidelines nevertheless require a finding of 
``disabled'' for individuals who are age 55 and over who can still do 
the full range of ``light'' work unless they have transferable skills 
or recent education that provides for direct entry into skilled work.
    While relevant, age has become less of a factor in determining 
whether individuals can make an adjustment to other work. Therefore, in 
addition to increasing our age categories by two years, we are 
proposing to revise the definition in our regulations for the category 
of ``advanced age'' to include individuals who are age 65 or older.

Why Was This Solution Chosen?

    A review of the preambles to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(NPRM) and the final regulations that first defined the current age 
ranges helps us to illuminate why we are now proposing to change them. 
The preambles articulate that there was no hard data when we drew the 
lines defining the age categories in 1978; rather, we based the age 
categories on information about ``progressive deteriorative changes'' 
that affect the ``vocational capacity to perform jobs'' as individuals 
get older, our adjudicative experience, and our analysis and 
interpretation of data about age and employment ``to ascertain a point 
where it would be realistic to ascribe vocational limitations based on 
chronological age.'' It should also be noted that some of the 
employment data we used in 1978 dated to as far back as 1957.
    In the NPRM, we stated:

    It is recognized that progressive deteriorative changes, which 
affect the vocational capacity to perform jobs, occur as individuals 
get older. Since no conclusive data which relate varying specific 
chronological ages to specific vocational limitations for performing 
jobs are available, it was necessary to analyze and interpret the 
available age and employment data to ascertain points where it would 
be realistic to ascribe vocational limitations based on 
chronological age. Past experience of the Social Security 
Administration in determining when age makes a difference in 
disability determinations has also been considered. * * *

43 FR at 9300 (emphasis added).
    We explained when we published the final rules:

    Reference sources and materials dealing with chronological age 
in terms of vocational relationship deal principally with employment 
and rehabilitation activities, basing their conclusions mainly on 
the rate of participation in the labor force, the unemployment rate, 
duration of unemployment, and the proportion of hires to applicants. 
* * *
    In viewing the overall implications of the data in the sources 
cited, it must be recognized that there is a direct relationship 
between age and the likelihood of employment. However, the statutory 
definition of disability provides specifically that vocational 
factors must be viewed in terms of their effect on the ability to 
perform jobs rather than the ability to obtain jobs--in essence, in 
terms of how the progressive deteriorative changes which occur as 
individuals get older affect their vocational capacities to perform 
jobs. Since no data or sources are available which relate var[y]ing 
specific chronological ages to specific vocational limitations for 
performing jobs, it has been necessary to analyze and interpret the 
available age-employment data to ascertain a point where it would be 
realistic to ascribe vocational limitations based on chronological 
age.
    Prior experience of the Social Security Administration in 
determining when age makes a difference in disability determinations 
has also been considered. * * *

43 FR 55349, 55353 (November 28, 1978) (emphasis added).
    Moreover, in response to public comments about our definitions of 
the age categories we explained:

    We acknowledge that there are no conclusive data which relate 
varying specific chronologi[c]al ages to specific physiologically 
based vocational limitations for performing jobs; this was a 
pioneering effort by SSA due to the unique nature of its disability 
program. Although ages 45, 50, 55 and 60 may be considered by some 
as too sharply defined as points in a progression of increasing 
difficulties, the concept of adversity of the aging process for 
severely impaired persons approaching advanced or retirement age is 
not arbitrary. * * *

    Id. at 55359 (emphasis added).
    As illustrated above, our analysis of current public health studies 
concludes that significant changes have occurred in the past 25 years 
which have not been reflected in our regulations. The United States has 
experienced a fundamental shift from a manufacturing based economy to a 
service based economy. Today, manufacturing's share of non-farm jobs is 
half of what it was in 1970.\17\ We would be remiss in our stewardship 
responsibilities if we failed

[[Page 67104]]

to acknowledge these important developments. Indeed, in the NPRM that 
included the rules that established the current age categories, we 
noted:

    \17\ U.S. Department of Labor, Futurework: Trends and Challenges 
for Work in the 21st Century (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Labor). Available from: http://www.dol.gov/asp/programs/history/herman/reports/futurework/report/pdf/ch4.pdf. Accessed 31 August 
2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    [I]t is apparently the view of the staff of the House Ways and 
Means Committee that Congress intended the [Commissioner] to have 
not only the power, but also the duty, to issue regulations 
[regarding the vocational factors]. The staff, commenting on the 
broad language of the disability definition enacted by Congress, 
concluded that:
    The original idea was that the broad language of the statutory 
definition would be amplified by regulations based on operational 
experience. (Staff of the House Committee on Ways and Means, 93d 
Cong., 2d Sess., Committee Staff Report on the Disability Insurance 
Program 6 (July 1974).)
    The staff went on to suggest that [SSA]
    * * * should explore the possibilities as to whether the 
definition of disability can be stated more specifically in the law 
or regulation, and whether more operational presumptions may be 
incorporated into its administration * * *

43 FR 9284, 9293 (March 7, 1978) (emphasis added).
    Therefore, we determine the specific policy for how we consider age 
in evaluating claims for disability benefits, consistent with our 
authority to make rules and regulations under sections 205(a) and 
1631(d)(1) of the Act.

What Rules Are We Proposing To Revise?

    We are proposing revisions that would change our definitions of the 
categories for the vocational factor of ``age'' in Sec. Sec.  404.1563 
and 416.963 and related rules. The changes would:
     Remove references to age 65 as the end of the ``advanced 
age'' category and therefore remove references to ``closely approaching 
retirement age'' as a description of a subcategory of the ``advanced 
age'' category,
     Increase the ending age for the category ``younger 
person'' by 2 years, from age 49 to age 51,
     Increase the beginning of the age subcategory for younger 
persons who are illiterate or unable to communicate in English by 2 
years, from age 45 to age 47,
     Increase the beginning and ending ages for the category 
``closely approaching advanced age'' by 2 years, from age 50-54 to age 
52-56, and
     Increase by 2 years the beginning age for the category 
``advanced age'' from age 55 to age 57, and for the subcategory for 
older persons of ``advanced age'' from age 60 to age 62.
    The following chart summarizes the current rules and these proposed 
changes:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Age category               Current rules      Proposed rules
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Younger individual..............  Age 18-49.........  Under age 52.
Younger individual, illiterate    Age 45-49.........  Age 47-51.
 or unable to communicate in
 English.
Closely approaching advanced age  Age 50-54.........  Age 52-56.
Advanced age....................  Age 55-64.........  Age 57 or older.
Closely approaching retirement    Age 60-64.........  Age 62 or older.
 age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are not proposing to change the rules under part 404 of our 
regulations for statutorily blind individuals who are age 55 or older; 
those rules are mandated by the Act and therefore may not be changed 
without action by Congress. We are also not proposing to change any 
other rules related to age, such as the age for early retirement (age 
62) and the age at which you may qualify for Medicare (age 65) based on 
retirement; these rules are also required by the Act.

Explanation of Changes

    The following is an explanation of the specific changes we are 
proposing.
    We are proposing to revise Sec. Sec.  404.1563(c), (d), and (e) and 
416.963(c), (d), and (e) to raise the ending ages of each of the age 
categories by 2 years. As a consequence, these changes would raise by 2 
years the starting ages for the categories ``person closely approaching 
advanced age,'' ``person of advanced age,'' and ``closely approaching 
retirement age.'' The proposed new categories would be as follows:
     Younger person (proposed Sec. Sec.  404.1563(c) and 
416.963(c))--an individual who has not attained age 52. The current 
rules define the age category as age 18 to the 49 (i.e., prior to the 
attainment of age 50). We propose to remove the reference to age 18 as 
the starting point of the age category because we sometimes have to 
make disability determinations using the sequential evaluation process 
for adults for individuals who are under age 18; for example, we 
sometimes have to determine whether individuals entitled to child's 
insurance benefits who are age 16-18 are disabled for purposes of 
determining whether their mothers or fathers can receive mother's or 
father's insurance benefits (see Sec.  404.339 of our regulations). 
Consistent with other changes in these proposed rules, we would also 
increase the subcategory applicable to ``younger individuals'' who are 
illiterate and unable to communicate in English by 2 years, from age 
45-49 to age 47-51.
     Closely approaching advanced age (proposed Sec. Sec.  
404.1563(d) and 416.963(d))--age 52-56.
     Advanced age (proposed Sec. Sec.  404.1563(e) and 
416.963(e))--age 57 or older. Consistent with other changes in these 
proposed rules, we would also increase the age at which we first 
consider individuals to be ``closely approaching retirement age'' by 2 
years, from age 60 to age 62. Also, as we noted earlier in this 
preamble, we sometimes make disability determinations for individuals 
who are older than ``full retirement age.'' Therefore, we propose to 
remove the term ``closely approaching retirement age'' in these 
sections and throughout our other regulations. Instead we would refer 
only to ``advanced age, age 62 or older'' or just ``age 62 or older,'' 
as appropriate to the context of the language of the rule. For clarity, 
we propose to revise the age criterion for rule 203.10 to ``advanced 
age, age 57-61.''
    In addition, we propose to make conforming changes to the following 
regulations for the same reasons that we are changing the rules in 
Sec. Sec.  404.1563 and 416.963 and for consistency in our rules:
     In Sec. Sec.  404.1562(b) and 416.962(b), we would change 
the provision for individuals who are at least 55 years old, have no 
more than a ``limited'' education (see Sec. Sec.  404.1564 and 
416.964), and have no past relevant work, to increase the age 
requirement to 57 years.
     In the first sentence of Sec. Sec.  404.1568(d)(4) and 
416.968(d)(4), we would change the provisions that refer to ``advanced 
age'' from age 55 to age 57. In the fifth and sixth sentences, we would 
change the provisions that refer to transferability of skills in 
individuals who are at least 60 years old to increase the age 
requirement to 62 years.
     In appendix 2 to subpart P of part 404, the Medical-
Vocational Guidelines, we propose to make conforming changes in 
Sec. Sec.  201.00(d)-(i), 202.00(d), 202.00(f)-(g), and 203.00(b)-(c). 
We would also change the reference to ``closely approaching retirement 
age'' in Rule

[[Page 67105]]

203.01 in Table No. 3 to ``advanced age, age 62 or older.''

Why are We Proposing To Remove References to Age 65 as the End of the 
``Advanced Age'' Category?

    Even though our current regulations do not include rules for 
evaluating disability of individuals who are at least 65 years old, we 
have other published policy statements that we use to make these 
decisions. See Social Security Ruling (SSR) 03-3p: ``Policy 
Interpretation Ruling--Titles II and XVI: Evaluation of Disability and 
Blindness in Initial Claims for Individuals Aged 65 or Older,'' 68 FR 
63833 (2003). The proposal in these regulations to remove the reference 
to age 64 as the end of the category of ``advanced age'' would only 
incorporate into our regulations longstanding policy interpretations 
currently set forth in SSR 03-3p.
    Although our regulations currently provide that the highest age 
category, advanced age, ends with the attainment of age 65, we 
sometimes have to make disability determinations for people who are 
older, as described in the situations set forth below.
     Section 216(l) of the Act provides for a gradual increase 
in the full retirement age from age 65 to age 67. These changes first 
affected individuals who were born in 1938; that is, who turned age 65 
in 2003. By 2027, the incremental increases will be complete, and a 
full retirement age of 67 will be applicable to all individuals who 
were born in 1960 or later. (These provisions do not change the age at 
which an individual can take early retirement at a reduced benefit 
amount, which remains at age 62.) Under title II, an individual can 
establish entitlement to benefits based on disability or blindness 
until the month in which he or she attains full retirement age. 
Therefore, as a result of the increases in the full retirement age, we 
are now processing some disability claims under title II of the Act for 
individuals who are aged 65 or older as described below:
     Under Public Law 104-193, the Personal Responsibility and 
Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, as amended, ``qualified'' 
aliens who were lawfully residing in the United States on August 22, 
1996, and who are disabled or blind as defined in section 1614(a) of 
the Act are eligible for benefits under title XVI, so long as all other 
eligibility requirements are met. Individuals can establish eligibility 
based on disability or blindness at any age, even on or after 
attainment of age 65.
    We may also need to make determinations of disability under title 
XVI for other individuals aged 65 or older to determine:
     State supplements in some States under section 1616 of the 
Act;
     Whether the work incentive provisions of section 1619(b) 
of the Act are applicable; or
     Appropriate deeming of income and resources under section 
1621(f)(1) of the Act and Sec. Sec.  416.1160, 416.1161, 416.1166a, and 
416.1204 of our regulations.

What Programs Would These Proposed Regulations Affect?

    These proposed regulations would affect disability determinations 
and decisions we make under title II and title XVI of the Act. In 
addition, to the extent that Medicare entitlement and Medicaid 
eligibility are based on whether you qualify for disability benefits 
under title II or title XVI, these regulations would also affect the 
Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Who Can Get Disability Benefits?

    Under title II of the Act, we provide for the payment of disability 
benefits if you are disabled and belong to one of the following three 
groups:
     Workers insured under the Act,
     Children of insured workers, and
     Widows, widowers, and surviving divorced spouses (see 
Sec.  404.336) of insured workers.
    Under title XVI of the Act, we provide for Supplemental Security 
Income (SSI) payments on the basis of disability if you are disabled 
and have limited income and resources.

How Do We Define ``Disability''?

    Under both the title II and title XVI programs, disability must be 
the result of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment 
or combination of impairments that is expected to result in death or 
which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of 
at least 12 months. Our definitions of disability are shown in the 
following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Disability means you
                                                      have a medically
 If you file a claim under . .                          determinalbe
               .                And you are . . .     impairment(s) as
                                                    described above that
                                                      results in . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
title II......................  an adult or a      the inability to do
                                 child.             any substantial
                                                    gainful activity
                                                    (SGA).
title XVI.....................  an individual age  the inability to do
                                 18 or older.       any SGA.
title XVI.....................  an individual      marked and severe
                                 udner age 18.      functional
                                                    limitations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As required by sections 223(d) and 1614(a)(3) of the Act, if you 
are an adult, we consider you to be disabled only if your physical or 
mental impairment(s) is so severe that you are not only unable to do 
your previous work, but you cannot, considering your age, education, 
and work experience, engage in any other kind of substantial gainful 
activity that exists in the national economy. This is true regardless 
of whether this kind of work exists in the immediate area in which you 
live, whether a specific job vacancy exists for you, or whether you 
would be hired if you applied for work. (See sections 223(d)(2)(A) and 
1614(a)(3)(B) of the Act.)

How Do We Decide Whether You Are Disabled?

    If you are applying for title II benefits or if you are an adult 
applying for title XVI benefits, we use a five-step sequential 
evaluation process, which we describe in our regulations at Sec. Sec.  
404.1520 and 416.920, to decide whether you are disabled under the 
statutory definition. We follow the five steps in order and stop as 
soon as we can make a determination or decision. The steps are:
    1. Are you working and is the work you are doing substantial 
gainful activity? If you are working and engaging in substantial 
gainful activity, we will find that you are not disabled regardless of 
your medical condition or your age, education, and work experience. If 
not, we will go on to step two.
    2. Do you have a ``severe'' impairment? If you do not have an 
impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits your 
physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, we will find 
that you are not disabled. If you do, we will go on to step three.
    3. Do you have an impairment(s) that meets or medically equals the 
severity of an impairment in the listings? If you do, and the 
impairment(s) meets the duration requirement, we will find you 
disabled. If you do not, we will go on to step four of the sequence.

[[Page 67106]]

    4. Do you have the residual functional capacity (RFC) to do your 
past relevant work? If you do, we will find that you are not disabled. 
If you do not, we will go on to step five.
    5. Does your impairment(s) prevent you from doing any other work 
that exists in the national economy, considering your residual 
functional capacity, age, education, and work experience? If it does, 
and it meets the duration requirement, we will find that you are 
disabled. If it does not, we will find that you are not disabled.
    If you are already receiving benefits, we use a different 
sequential evaluation process when we decide whether your disability 
continues. See Sec. Sec.  404.1594 and 416.994 of our regulations. This 
process also includes a step that considers your ability to do other 
work, considering your RFC and your vocational factors of age, 
education, and past work experience.

How Do We Use the Medical-Vocational Rules?

    As discussed in Sec. Sec.  404.1569 and 416.969, at step five of 
the sequential evaluation process we use the medical-vocational rules 
in appendix 2 of subpart P of part 404. (By reference, Sec.  416.969 of 
the regulations provides that appendix 2 also applies to adults 
claiming SSI payments based on disability.) In general, the medical-
vocational rules take administrative notice of the existence of 
numerous unskilled occupations at the exertional levels defined in the 
regulations, such as ``sedentary,'' ``light,'' and ``medium.'' The 
rules consider RFC and the vocational factors of age, education, and 
past work experience in terms of an individual's ability to adjust to 
other work.
    The medical-vocational rules direct a determination or decision 
whether you are disabled if your RFC and vocational factors (i.e., your 
age, education, and past work experience) match the criteria in a rule. 
If your RFC or any one of the vocational factors of age, education, and 
past work experience do not match the criteria in a medical-vocational 
rule, the rules provide a framework for making a determination or 
decision at this step.
    Under our policy, we recognize that advancing age makes it 
increasingly more difficult for older persons to adjust to other work 
and the medical-vocational rules reflect that policy. However, if you 
have skilled or semiskilled work experience, you may have gained skills 
that make it easier for you to adjust to other work--even at an 
advanced age. If your skills can be used in (transferred to) other 
skilled or semiskilled work within your RFC, we will ordinarily find 
that you can adjust to other work and are not disabled regardless of 
your age or education. Some rules in appendix 2 also direct a 
conclusion, or provide a framework for deciding whether a person is 
disabled, when a person has ``skills'' acquired from previous skilled 
or semiskilled work that are ``transferable'' to other skilled or 
semiskilled work.

What Are Our Rules on Age as a Vocational Factor?

    Our basic rules regarding age as a vocational factor, including our 
rules defining the age categories we use in appendix 2, are found in 
Sec. Sec.  404.1563 and 416.963, ``Your age as a vocational factor.'' 
Under these regulations, we define three broad age categories:
     In current Sec. Sec.  404.1563(c) and 416.963(c), we 
define a younger person as an individual who is under age 50. We 
explain that, if you are in this category, we generally do not consider 
that your age will seriously affect your ability to adjust to other 
work. Within this category, however, we include a subcategory for 
individuals who are age 45-49; we explain that in some circumstances we 
consider that these persons are more limited in their ability to adjust 
to other work than persons who have not attained age 45.
     In current Sec. Sec.  404.1563(d) and 416.963(d), we 
define a person closely approaching advanced age as an individual who 
is age 50-54. We explain that, if you are in this category, 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.
     In current Sec. Sec.  404.1563(e) and 416.963(e), we 
define a person of advanced age as an individual who is age 55 or 
older. We also include a subcategory for individuals who are age 60-64, 
which we call closely approaching retirement age. We explain that we 
have special rules for individuals who are closely approaching 
retirement age in our rules regarding transferability of skills for 
individuals of advanced age, in Sec. Sec.  404.1568(d)(4) and 
416.968(d)(4).
    In addition, other disability rules refer to particular ages and 
age categories. As previously noted, we are proposing to make changes 
to the following sections:
     Sections 404.1562 and 416.962, ``Medical-vocational 
profiles showing an inability to make an adjustment to other work,'' 
include a special provision for individuals who are at least 55 years, 
have no more than a limited education, and have no past relevant work 
experience. (See Sec. Sec.  404.1562(b) and 416.962(b).)
     Sections 404.1568(d)(4) and 416.968(d)(4), provide our 
rules for determining transferability of skills for individuals who are 
of ``advanced age,'' including individuals who are ``closely 
approaching retirement age.''
     The rules and explanatory text of appendix 2 of subpart P 
of part 404 provide guidance for considering the different age 
categories defined in Sec. Sec.  404.1563 and 416.963 when we determine 
whether you can make an adjustment to other work.

What Is Our Authority To Make Rules and Set Procedures for Determining 
Whether a Person Is Disabled Under the Statutory Definition?

    Section 205(a) of the Act and, by reference to section 205(a), 
section 1631(d)(1) provide that:

    The Commissioner of Social Security shall have full power and 
authority to make rules and regulations and to establish procedures, 
not inconsistent with the provisions of this title, which are 
necessary or appropriate to carry out such provisions, and shall 
adopt reasonable and proper rules and regulations to regulate and 
provide for the nature and extent of the proofs and evidence and the 
method of taking and furnishing the same in order to establish the 
right to benefits hereunder.

Clarity of These Proposed Rules

    Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, as amended by E.O. 13258, requires 
each agency to write all rules in plain language. In addition to your 
substantive comments on these final rules, we invite your comments on 
how to make them easier to understand.
    For example:
     Have we organized the material to suit your needs?
     Are the requirements in the rules clearly stated?
     Do the rules contain technical language or jargon that 
isn't clear?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, 
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rules easier to understand?
     Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
     Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or 
diagrams?
     What else could we do to make the rules easier to 
understand?

When Will We Start To Use These Rules?

    We will not use these rules until we evaluate the public comments 
we receive on them, determine whether they should be issued as final 
rules, and issue final rules in the Federal Register. If we publish 
final rules, we will explain in the preamble how we will apply them, 
and summarize and

[[Page 67107]]

respond to the public comments. Until the effective date of any final 
rules, we will continue to use our current rules.

Regulatory Procedures

Executive Order 12866

    We have consulted with the Office of Management and Budget and have 
determined that these proposed rules meet the criteria for an 
economically significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, 
as amended by Executive Order 13258. The Office of the Chief Actuary 
estimates that these proposed rules, if finalized, will result in 
reduced program outlays resulting in the following savings (in millions 
of dollars) over the next 10 years:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Reduction in Federal benefit outlays
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Fiscal year                       OASDI         SSI        Medicare     Medicaid      Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006...........................................          136           21  ...........            8          165
2007...........................................          263           43  ...........           26          332
2008...........................................          229           53           51           37          369
2009...........................................          243           63          102           50          459
2010...........................................          303           75          109           59          546
2011...........................................          326           94          117           76          612
2012...........................................          369           93          135           94          691
2013...........................................          414          115          153          107          789
2014...........................................          454          130          173          128          884
2015...........................................          495          146          195          151          987
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
Totals:
    2006-10....................................        1,174          255          262          180        1,871
    2006-15....................................        3,231          834        1,034          735       5,834
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Totals may not equal the sum of the rounded components.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

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

Paperwork Reduction Act

    These proposed rules impose no reporting or recordkeeping 
requirements requiring OMB clearance.

References

    The sources we consulted while developing these proposed rules are 
cited in the preamble text.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs 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: October 28, 2005.
Jo Anne B. Barnhart,
Commissioner of Social Security.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, we are proposing to amend 
subpart P of part 404 and subpart I of part 416 of chapter III of title 
20 of the Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:

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

Subpart P--[Amended]

    1. The authority citation for subpart P 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. Amend Sec.  404.1562 by revising the heading and the first 
sentence of paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  404.1562  Medical-vocational profiles showing an inability to 
make an adjustment to other work.

* * * * *
    (b) If you are at least 57 years old, have no more than a limited 
education, and have no past relevant work experience. If you have a 
severe, medically determinable impairment(s) (see Sec. Sec.  
404.1520(c), 404.1521, and 404.1523), are of advanced age (age 57 or 
older, see Sec.  404.1563), have a limited education or less (see Sec.  
404.1564), and have no past relevant work experience (see Sec.  
404.1565), we will find you disabled. * * *
* * * * *
    3. Amend Sec.  404.1563 by revising paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  404.1563  Your age as a vocational factor.

* * * * *
    (c) Younger person. If you are a younger person (under age 52), 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 47-51 are more limited in their ability to 
adjust to other work than persons who have not attained age 47. See 
Rule 201.17 in appendix 2.
    (d) Person closely approaching advanced age. If you are closely 
approaching advanced age (age 52-56), 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 
57 or older) age significantly affects a person's ability to adjust to 
other work. We have special rules for persons of advanced age, 
including persons in this category who are age 62 or older. See Sec.  
404.1568(d)(4).
* * * * *

[[Page 67108]]

    4. Amend Sec.  404.1568 by revising the first, fifth, and sixth 
sentences of 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 57 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). * * * If you 
are of advanced age but have not attained age 62, 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 age 62 or older 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. * * *
    5. Amend section 201.00 of appendix 2, subpart P, part 404--
Medical-Vocational Guidelines--by revising the first sentence of 
paragraph (d), paragraph (f), the first sentence of paragraph (g), 
paragraph (h)(1) introductory text, the first sentence of paragraph 
(h)(2), the first sentence of paragraph (h)(3), and the last sentence 
of paragraph (i) to read as follows:

APPENDIX 2 TO SUBPART P OF PART 404--MEDICAL-VOCATIONAL GUIDELINES

* * * * *
    201.00 Maximum sustained work capability limited to sedentary 
work as a result of severe medically determinable impairment(s).
* * * * *
    (d) The adversity of functional restrictions to sedentary work 
at advanced age (57 or older) for individuals with no relevant past 
work or who can no longer perform vocationally relevant past work 
and have no transferable skills, warrants a finding of disabled in 
the absence of the rare situation where the individual has recently 
completed education which provides a basis for direct entry into 
skilled sedentary work. * * *
* * * * *
    (f) In order to find transferability of skills to skilled 
sedentary work for individuals who are of advanced age (57 or 
older), there must be very little, if any, vocational adjustment 
required in terms of tools, work processes, work settings, or the 
industry.
    (g) Individuals approaching advanced age (age 52-56) may be 
significantly limited in vocational adaptability if they are 
restricted to sedentary work. * * *
* * * * *
    (h)(1) The term younger individual is used to denote an 
individual who has not attained age 52. For individuals who are age 
47-51, age is a less advantageous factor for making an adjustment to 
other work than for those who have not attained age 47. Accordingly, 
a finding of ``disabled'' is warranted for individuals age 47-51 
who: * * *
    (2) For individuals who are under age 47, age is a more 
advantageous factor for making an adjustment to other work. * * *
    (3) Nevertheless, a decision of ``disabled'' may be appropriate 
for some individuals under age 47 (or individuals age 47-51 for whom 
rule 201.17 does not direct a decision of disabled) who do not have 
the ability to perform a full range of sedentary work. * * *
* * * * *
    (i) * * * Thus, the functional capability for a full range of 
sedentary work represents sufficient numbers of jobs to indicate 
substantial vocational scope for those individuals who have not 
attained age 47 even if they are illiterate or unable to communicate 
in English.
* * * * *
    6. Amend section 202.00 of appendix 2, subpart P, part 404--
Medical-Vocational Guidelines--by revising paragraph (d), paragraph 
(f), the last sentence of paragraph (g) to read as follows:

APPENDIX 2 TO SUBPART P OF PART 404--MEDICAL-VOCATIONAL GUIDELINES

* * * * *
    202.00 Maximum sustained work capability limited to light work 
as a result of severe medically determinable impairment(s).
* * * * *
    (d) Where the same factors in paragraph (c) of this section 
regarding education and work experience are present, but where age, 
though not advanced, is a factor which significantly limits 
vocational adaptability (i.e., closely approaching advanced age, 52-
56) and an individual's vocational scope is further significantly 
limited by illiteracy or inability to communicate in English, a 
finding of disabled is warranted.
* * * * *
    (f) For a finding of transferability of skills to light work for 
individuals of advanced age who are age 62 or older, there must be 
very little, if any, vocational adjustment required in terms of 
tools, work processes, work settings, or the industry.
    (g) * * * This, in turn, represents substantial vocational scope 
for younger individuals (individuals who have not attained age 52) 
even if illiterate or unable to communicate in English.
* * * * *
    7. Amend section 203.00 of appendix 2, subpart P, part 404--
Medical-Vocational Guidelines--by revising the second sentence of 
paragraph (b), paragraph (c), and the age criteria for Rules 203.01 and 
203.10 in Table No. 3 to read as follows:

APPENDIX 2 TO SUBPART P OF PART 404--MEDICAL-VOCATIONAL GUIDELINES

* * * * *
    203.00 Maximum sustained work capability limited to medium work 
as a result of severe medically determinable impairment(s).
* * * * *
    (b) * * * Even the adversity of advanced age (57 or over) and a 
work history of unskilled work may be offset by the substantial work 
capability represented by the functional capacity to perform medium 
work. * * *
    (c) However, the absence of any relevant work experience becomes 
a more significant adversity for individuals of advanced age (57 or 
older). Accordingly, this factor, in combination with a limited 
education or less, militates against making a vocational adjustment 
to even this substantial range of work and a finding of disabled is 
appropriate. Further, for individuals age 62 or older with a work 
history of unskilled work and with marginal education or less, a 
finding of disabled is appropriate.

[[Page 67109]]



Table No. 3.--Residual Functional Capacity: Maximum Sustained Work Capability Limited to Medium Work as a Result
                                 of Severe Medically Determinable Impairment(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Previous work
              Rule                        Age              Education          experience           Decision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
203.01..........................  Advanced age, age   Marginal or none..  Unskilled or none.  Disabled.
                                   62 or older.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
203.10..........................  Advanced age, age   Limited or less...  None..............  Disabled.
                                   57-61.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

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

Subpart I--[Amended]

    8. The authority citation for subpart I 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 1383(b); 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).

    9. Amend Sec.  416.962 by revising the paragraph heading and the 
first sentence of paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  416.962  Medical-vocational profiles showing an inability to make 
an adjustment to other work.

* * * * *
    (b) If you are at least 57 years old, have no more than a limited 
education, and have no past relevant work experience. If you have a 
severe, medically determinable impairment(s) (see Sec. Sec.  
416.920(c), 416.921, and 416.923), are of advanced age (age 57 or 
older, see Sec.  416.963), have a limited education or less (see Sec.  
416.964), and have no past relevant work experience (see Sec.  
416.965), we will find you disabled. * * *
    10. Amend Sec.  416.963 by revising paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  416.963  Your age as a vocational factor.

* * * * *
    (c) Younger person. If you are a younger person (under age 52), 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 47-51 are more limited in their ability to 
adjust to other work than persons who have not attained age 47. 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 52-56), 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 
57 or older) age significantly affects a person's ability to adjust to 
other work. We have special rules for persons of advanced age, 
including persons in this category who are age 62 or older. See Sec.  
416.968(d)(4).
* * * * *
    11. Amend Sec.  416.968 by revising the first, fifth, and sixth 
sentences of 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 57 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). * * * If you 
are of advanced age but have not attained age 62, 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 age 62 or older 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. * * *

[FR Doc. 05-21975 Filed 11-3-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191-02-P