[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 204 (Friday, October 21, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65366-65371]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27236]


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

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

20 CFR Parts 404 and 416

[Docket No. SSA-2007-0092]
RIN 0960-AG72


Amendments to Procedures for Certain Determinations and Decisions

AGENCY: Social Security Administration.

ACTION: Final Rules.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising the procedures for how claimants who receive 
fully favorable revised determinations based on prehearing case reviews 
or fully favorable attorney advisor decisions may seek further

[[Page 65367]]

review. We are also revising our procedure to provide that we will 
notify claimants who receive partially favorable determinations based 
on prehearing case reviews that an administrative law judge (ALJ) will 
still hold a hearing unless all parties to the hearing tell us in 
writing that we should dismiss the hearing request. These changes will 
simplify our administrative review process and free up scarce 
administrative resources that we can better use to reduce the hearings-
level case backlog.

DATES: These final rules are effective on November 21, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua Silverman, Office of 
Regulations, Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard, 
Baltimore, MD 21235-6401, (410) 594-2128. For information on 
eligibility or filing for benefits, call our national toll-free number, 
1-800-772-1213 or TTY 1-800-325-0778, or visit our Internet site, 
Social Security Online, at http://www.socialsecurity.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In most cases, we decide claims for benefits using an 
administrative review process that consists of four levels: initial 
determination, reconsideration, hearing, and appeal. 20 CFR 404.900 and 
416.1400. We make an initial determination at the first level. A 
claimant who is dissatisfied with the initial determination may request 
reconsideration.\1\ A claimant dissatisfied with the reconsidered 
determination may request a hearing before an ALJ. Finally, if 
dissatisfied with the ALJ's decision, a claimant may request that the 
Appeals Council review that decision.\2\ After a claimant has completed 
these administrative steps and received our final decision, he or she 
may request judicial review of the final decision in Federal district 
court.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For disability claims, ten States participate in a 
``prototype'' test under 20 CFR 404.906 and 416.1406. In these 
States, we eliminated the reconsideration step of the administrative 
review process. Claimants and other parties who are dissatisfied 
with the initial determinations on their disability cases may 
request a hearing before an ALJ. The ten States are: Alabama, 
Alaska, California (Los Angeles North and West Branches), Colorado, 
Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, and 
Pennsylvania.
    \2\ We define the words ``determination'' and ``decision'' in 20 
CFR 404.901 and 416.1401. At the initial and reconsideration levels 
of the administrative review process, we issue ``determinations.'' 
ALJs issue ``decisions,'' as may the Appeals Council when it reviews 
an ALJ's decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We handle requests for ALJ hearings in several ways. At the hearing 
level, most claimants receive a decision from an ALJ.\3\ An ALJ may 
hold a hearing and issue a fully favorable, partially favorable, or 
unfavorable decision. An ALJ may also issue a decision without holding 
an oral hearing if the claimant and any other parties waive their right 
to appear at a hearing or if the decision is fully favorable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ An ALJ may also send the case to the Appeals Council with a 
recommended decision or dismiss a request for a hearing. 20 CFR 
404.953(c), 404.957, 416.1453(d), and 416.1457.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are two other ways we may issue a favorable determination or 
decision without holding a hearing. A State disability determination 
service or an agency component may issue a fully or partially favorable 
revised determination under the prehearing case review process in 20 
CFR 404.941 and 416.1441. In addition, an attorney advisor may issue a 
fully favorable decision under the attorney advisor process in 20 CFR 
404.942 and 416.1442. These processes help us adjudicate cases pending 
at the hearing level more quickly while preserving claimants' right to 
a hearing before an ALJ.

Prehearing Case Review

    The prehearing case review process allows us to refer a case back 
to the component that issued the determination under review. That 
component decides whether to revise its determination and issue a fully 
or partially favorable revised determination. We may conduct a 
prehearing case review if:
    1. We receive additional evidence;
    2. There is an indication that additional evidence is available;
    3. There is a change in the law or regulations; or
    4. There is an error in the file or some other indication that the 
prior determination may be revised.
    20 CFR 404.941(b), 416.1441(b).
    Our current regulations state that if we issue a fully favorable 
revised determination, we notify the claimant and all other parties 
that the ALJ will dismiss the hearing request unless a party requests 
that the hearing proceed. The claimant or other party must make this 
request in writing within 30 days after the date we mail the notice of 
the revised determination.
    If we issue a partially favorable revised determination, we notify 
the claimant and all other parties that we will continue with the ALJ 
hearing unless the claimant and all other parties agree to dismiss the 
hearing request. We do not specify how the claimant and all other 
parties must tell us that they agree to dismiss this hearing request.

Prehearing Decisions by Attorney Advisors

    Attorney advisors in our Office of Disability Adjudication and 
Review may conduct specific prehearing proceedings and, if appropriate, 
make fully favorable decisions based on the record. Attorney advisors 
may conduct prehearing proceedings under circumstances similar to those 
under which we conduct prehearing case reviews. 20 CFR 404.942(b) and 
416.1442(b).
    Under our current rules, if an attorney advisor issues a fully 
favorable decision, we wait 30 days before we dismiss the hearing 
request. We created the 30-day period to allow a claimant or other 
party time to ask us to proceed with the hearing.

Changes

    Our adjudicative experience shows that claimants who receive a 
fully favorable determination or decision rarely ask us to continue 
with a hearing. In fact, claimants may be confused by a notice 
dismissing their request for a hearing several weeks after they 
received a fully favorable determination or decision on their claim. As 
a result, we spent administrative resources: (1) Processing the 
dismissals of requests for hearing because we had to wait until the 30-
day period ended before we dismissed the request for a hearing; (2) 
answering claimants' questions; and (3) explaining what the dismissal 
notice meant.
    Changing our procedures will both simplify the administrative 
review process and free scarce administrative resources that we will 
better use to reduce the hearings backlog.
    Therefore, we are revising the way claimants can obtain further 
review of fully favorable and partially favorable prehearing case 
review determinations and fully favorable attorney advisor decisions. 
These changes preserve a claimant's right to have an ALJ hearing, even 
when we have already issued a fully favorable determination or 
decision.
    Whenever a claimant or other party seeks further review of a 
favorable determination or decision, we will continue to consider the 
entire case record including the determination or decision. Further 
review of a favorable determination or decision may result in a 
determination or decision that is less favorable or unfavorable to a 
claimant.

Revised Procedures for Prehearing Case Reviews

    If we issue a fully favorable revised determination in the 
prehearing case review process, an ALJ will dismiss the

[[Page 65368]]

request for a hearing soon after the reviewing component issues the 
fully favorable determination. The notice accompanying the ALJ's order 
of dismissal will advise all parties that if they disagree with the 
revised determination, they have 60 days from the date they receive the 
notice to request that the ALJ vacate the dismissal. The ALJ will 
extend the 60-day time limit if a party making a request shows that he 
or she had good cause for missing the deadline. If a party timely 
requests that the ALJ vacate the dismissal, the ALJ will vacate the 
dismissal, reinstate the request for a hearing, and offer all parties 
an opportunity for a hearing.
    If we issue a partially favorable determination in the prehearing 
case review process, an ALJ will proceed to hold a hearing unless all 
parties to the hearing tell us in writing that they agree to dismiss 
the hearing request. If we receive a written statement(s) agreeing to a 
dismissal before an ALJ mails a notice of his or her decision, we will 
dismiss the request for a hearing.
    We include these changes in final sections 404.941, 404.960, 
416.1441, and 416.1460. In response to a public comment, we are 
adopting final regulatory language that differs from the language we 
proposed, as we discuss in more detail below.

Revised Procedures for Attorney Advisor Prehearing Decisions

    If an attorney advisor issues a fully favorable decision, we will 
consider the decision to be a hearing-level decision, and we will not 
issue a notice of dismissal of the hearing request. The notice of the 
attorney advisor's decision will state that if a party to the hearing 
disagrees with the attorney advisor's decision for any reason, the 
party must request that an ALJ reinstate the request for a hearing 
within 60 days of the date he or she receives notice of the decision. 
The ALJ will extend the 60-day time limit if the party making the 
request shows that he or she had good cause for missing the deadline. 
If a party timely requests that the ALJ reinstate the request for a 
hearing, the ALJ will reinstate the request for a hearing and offer all 
parties to the hearing an opportunity for a hearing. We will process 
the fully favorable attorney advisor's decision while the hearing is 
pending.
    We include these changes in final sections 404.942 and 416.1442. In 
response to a public comment, we are adopting final regulatory language 
that differs from the language we proposed, as we discuss in more 
detail below.

Other Changes

    We are changing ``wholly favorable'' to ``fully favorable'' in 
final sections 404.941, 404.948, 416.1441, and 416.1448. We also are 
making additional changes for clarity in final sections 404.948, 
404.960, 416.1448, and 416.1460. These minor changes will make the 
language in these sections consistent with other related sections but 
will not alter their meaning.
    Finally, we are rescinding Social Security Ruling (SSR) 97-2p today 
in a separate notice in the Federal Register because we are 
incorporating some of the policies from SSR 97-2p and revising others 
in these final rules.

Public Comments

    We published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal 
Register on July 22, 2010, and we gave the public 60 days to comment on 
the NPRM. 75 FR 42639. We received one comment during this period. We 
carefully read and considered it. It is available for public viewing at 
http://www.regulations.gov. Because the comment was long, we have 
summarized and paraphrased it. We have tried to summarize the 
commenter's views accurately and to respond to the significant issues 
raised by the commenter that were within the scope of these rules.
    Comment: The commenter supported our proposed policy revisions, but 
stated that the proposed regulatory text was not easy enough to 
understand. The commenter asserted that the NPRM violated section 504 
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 \4\ because the proposed regulatory 
language was above the 12th grade reading level and some of the complex 
regulatory language was ``not understandable for many applicants and 
beneficiaries who have disabilities.'' The commenter suggested that we 
clarify the regulatory text by shortening certain sentences and 
avoiding long introductory clauses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 29 U.S.C. 794.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: We adopted the comment. We are working to improve the 
clarity of our regulations and appreciate the commenter's suggestions. 
In response to the commenter's suggestions, we shortened and 
reorganized text in final sections 404.941(d)-(e), 404.942(d), 
404.960(a)-(b), 416.1441(d)-(e), 416.1442(d), and 416.1460(a)-(b).
    However, we disagree with the commenter that our proposed rules 
would violate section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. While section 504 
and its implementing regulations require Federal agencies to 
communicate effectively with the public, they do not require Federal 
agencies to publish regulations at a specific reading level.
    We are also taking steps to communicate effectively with claimants 
and beneficiaries through our notices and by other means. We created an 
Office of Open Government to improve the clarity, tone, and readability 
of notices to ensure that we communicate effectively with the public. 
Each person to whom these final rules apply will receive a notice 
written in accordance with our notice standards. The notice will advise 
him or her of our determination or decision, of the options available 
if he or she wishes further review of that determination or decision, 
and of the time limits that apply to those options.
    Comment: The commenter suggested that we revise proposed 20 CFR 
404.960(a) and 416.1460(a) to clarify that the Appeals Council will 
notify the claimant in writing whether or not it vacates a dismissal of 
a request for a hearing. The commenter stated that the proposed 
language in these sections did not discuss whether the Appeals Council 
would notify the claimant if it did not vacate a dismissal of a request 
for a hearing.
    Response: We agree with the commenter that our proposed regulatory 
language was unclear on these processes and are adopting language in 
final sections 404.960(a) and 416.1460(a) that differs from the 
proposed language. These sections now clarify that, if the claimant 
files a request for review, the Appeals Council will notify the 
claimant about whether it granted or denied the request to vacate the 
dismissal. This final rule will also apply to ALJs when a claimant asks 
an ALJ to vacate a dismissal.
    The Appeals Council may also consider whether to vacate a dismissal 
on its own motion- that is, without any request from a claimant- under 
20 CFR 404.969 and 416.1469. We are clarifying that the Appeals Council 
will notify a claimant that it used its own motion review authority 
only if it decides to vacate a dismissal. The Appeals Council will not 
notify a claimant when it decides not to vacate a dismissal based on 
own motion review because it is not taking any action, and the claimant 
has not requested the review.
    Comment: The commenter suggested that we be consistent in the 
manner we present our standard of good cause. Specifically, the 
commenter suggested that we define ``good cause'' in proposed 20 CFR 
404.960(a) and 416.1460(a) by referencing our rules in 20 CFR 404.911 
and 416.1411. The

[[Page 65369]]

commenter noted that we refer to the good cause definition in 20 CFR 
404.911 and 416.1411 when we mention good cause in proposed 20 CFR 
404.941(d) and 416.1441(d).
    Response: We agree with the commenter that our proposed regulatory 
language could have been clearer. However, we are not adopting the 
comment that we revise the rules to refer to the good cause criteria in 
20 CFR 404.911 and 416.1411. Under our current policy, we consider each 
reason a claimant gives for making a request to vacate an order of 
dismissal on its own merit. Generally, we will vacate the order of 
dismissal if the claimant shows that the premise on which the ALJ or 
the Appeals Council based the dismissal order was erroneous. To clarify 
that point and to avoid confusion about the applicability of the good 
cause criteria in sections 404.911 and 416.1411, we are removing the 
words ``good cause'' from final sections 404.960(a) and 416.1460(a). 
Therefore, under these final rules, if you wish to request that the ALJ 
or the Appeals Council vacate a dismissal of a request for a hearing, 
you must do so within 60 days of the date you receive notice of the 
dismissal, and you must state why our dismissal of the request for a 
hearing was erroneous. This change is consistent with our current 
policy and clarifies that we may vacate a dismissal of a hearing 
request when a claimant shows us that the dismissal order was 
erroneous.
    Comment: The commenter asked us to revise the regulatory text about 
how long a claimant had to request that an ALJ reinstate a request for 
a hearing under proposed 20 CFR 404.941(d), 404.942(d), 416.1441(d), 
and 416.1442(d). We proposed that a claimant must respond to us within 
60 days after receiving notice of the fully favorable determination or 
decision. The commenter asked that we include a date certain in our 
notices for any required action instead of requiring claimants to 
calculate when the 60 days end. The commenter suggested specific 
regulatory language, including that a claimant ``may add 5 days to the 
deadline to allow for mailing time. The notice will provide the date by 
which you must ask.''
    Response: We did not adopt the commenter's suggested language. We 
state in these final rules that a claimant who wants an ALJ to 
reinstate a hearing request must file his or her request ``within 60 
days of the date you receive notice'' of the dismissal or decision in 
final sections 404.941(d), 404.942(d), 416.1441(d), and 416.1442(d). We 
use this approach throughout our regulations. Our current rules already 
define ``date you receive notice'' to mean ``5 days after the date on 
the notice, unless you show us that you did not receive it within the 
5-day period'' in 20 CFR 404.901 and 416.1401.
    We did not adopt the suggested regulatory language to include a 
``date certain'' by which a claimant must act based on 5 days for 
mailing time because our regulations acknowledge that a claimant may 
not receive the notice within this timeframe. In these instances, we 
allow the claimant to show us that he or she did not actually receive 
the notice within 5 days after the date on the notice.
    Comment: The commenter supported our proposal to specify in 
proposed 20 CFR 404.941(e) and 416.1441(e) that all parties to a 
partially favorable determination in the prehearing case review process 
must make their requests in writing if they want the ALJ to dismiss the 
request for a hearing. The commenter suggested that we specify that 
requests be in writing when parties appeal fully favorable 
determinations and decisions in 20 CFR 404.941(d), 404.942(d), 
416.1441(d), and 416.1442(d).
    Response: We adopted this comment. Our prior rules in these 
sections required that the requests be in writing, and this is not a 
change in our policy.

Regulatory Procedures

Executive Order 12866, as Supplemented by Executive Order 13563

    We consulted with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and 
determined that these final rules meet the criteria for a significant 
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by 
Executive Order 13563. Thus, OMB reviewed them.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    We certify that these final rules will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they 
only affect individuals. Therefore, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as 
amended, does not require us to prepare a regulatory flexibility 
analysis.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    These final rules do not impose any new reporting or recordkeeping 
requirements and are not 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: October 12, 2011.
Michael J. Astrue,
Commissioner of Social Security.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, we are amending title 20 
of the Code of Federal Regulations part 404 subpart J and part 416 
subpart N as set forth below:

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

Subpart J--[Amended]

0
1. The authority citation for subpart J of part 404 continues to read 
as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 201(j), 204(f), 205(a)-(b), (d)-(h), and (j), 
221, 223(i), 225, and 702(a)(5) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 401(j), 404(f), 405(a)-(b), (d)-(h), and (j), 421, 423(i), 
425, and 902(a)(5)); sec. 5, Pub. L. 97-455, 96 Stat. 2500 (42 
U.S.C. 405 note); secs. 5, 6(c)-(e), and 15, Pub. L. 98-460, 98 
Stat. 1802 (42 U.S.C. 421 note); sec. 202, Pub. L. 108-203, 118 
Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note).


0
2. Amend Sec.  404.941 by revising paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  404.941  Prehearing case review.

* * * * *
    (c) Notice of a prehearing revised determination. If we revise the 
determination in a prehearing case review, we will mail a written 
notice of the revised determination to all parties at their last known 
addresses. We will state the basis for the revised determination and 
advise all parties of the effect of the revised determination on the 
request for a hearing.
    (d) Effect of a fully favorable revised determination. If the 
revised determination is fully favorable to you, we will tell you in 
the notice that an administrative law judge will dismiss the request 
for a hearing. We will also tell you that you or another party to the 
hearing may request that the administrative law judge vacate the 
dismissal and reinstate the request for a hearing if you or another 
party to the

[[Page 65370]]

hearing disagrees with the revised determination for any reason. If you 
wish to make this request, you must do so in writing and send it to us 
within 60 days of the date you receive notice of the dismissal. If the 
request is timely, an administrative law judge will vacate the 
dismissal, reinstate the request for hearing, and offer you and all 
parties an opportunity for a hearing. The administrative law judge will 
extend the time limit if you show that you had good cause for missing 
the deadline. The administrative law judge will use the standards in 
Sec.  404.911 to determine whether you had good cause.
    (e) Effect of a partially favorable revised determination. If the 
revised determination is partially favorable to you, we will tell you 
in the notice what was not favorable. We will also tell you that an 
administrative law judge will hold the hearing you requested unless you 
and all other parties to the hearing agree in writing to dismiss the 
request for a hearing. An administrative law judge will dismiss the 
request for a hearing if we receive the written statement(s) agreeing 
to dismiss the request for a hearing before an administrative law judge 
mails a notice of his or her hearing decision.

0
3. Amend Sec.  404.942 by revising paragraphs (d), (e) introductory 
text, (e)(1), and (f)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  404.942  Prehearing proceedings and decisions by attorney 
advisors.

* * * * *
    (d) Notice of a decision by an attorney advisor. If an attorney 
advisor issues a fully favorable decision under this section, we will 
mail a written notice of the decision to all parties at their last 
known addresses. We will state the basis for the decision and advise 
all parties that they may request that an administrative law judge 
reinstate the request for a hearing if they disagree with the decision 
for any reason. Any party who wants to make this request must do so in 
writing and send it to us within 60 days of the date he or she receives 
notice of the decision. The administrative law judge will extend the 
time limit if the requestor shows good cause for missing the deadline. 
The administrative law judge will use the standards in Sec.  404.911 to 
determine whether there is good cause. If the request is timely, an 
administrative law judge will reinstate the request for a hearing and 
offer all parties an opportunity for a hearing.
    (e) Effect of an attorney advisor's decision. An attorney advisor's 
decision under this section is binding unless--
    (1) You or another party to the hearing submits a timely request 
that an administrative law judge reinstate the request for a hearing 
under paragraph (d) of this section;
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (3) Make the decision of an attorney advisor under paragraph (d) of 
this section subject to review by the Appeals Council if the Appeals 
Council decides to review the decision of the attorney advisor anytime 
within 60 days after the date of the decision under Sec.  404.969.
* * * * *

0
4. Amend Sec.  404.948 by revising the second sentence of paragraph 
(a), and paragraph (b)(1)(ii), to read as follows:


Sec.  404.948  Deciding a case without an oral hearing before an 
administrative law judge.

    (a) Decision fully favorable. * * * The notice of the decision will 
state that you have the right to an oral hearing and to examine the 
evidence on which the administrative law judge based the decision.
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) You live outside the United States, you do not inform us that 
you wish to appear, and there are no other parties who wish to appear.
* * * * *

0
5. Revise Sec.  404.960 to read as follows:


Sec.  404.960  Vacating a dismissal of a request for a hearing before 
an administrative law judge.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, an 
administrative law judge or the Appeals Council may vacate a dismissal 
of a request for a hearing if you request that we vacate the dismissal. 
If you or another party wish to make this request, you must do so 
within 60 days of the date you receive notice of the dismissal, and you 
must state why our dismissal of your request for a hearing was 
erroneous. The administrative law judge or Appeals Council will inform 
you in writing of the action taken on your request. The Appeals Council 
may also vacate a dismissal of a request for a hearing on its own 
motion. If the Appeals Council decides to vacate a dismissal on its own 
motion, it will do so within 60 days of the date we mail the notice of 
dismissal and will inform you in writing that it vacated the dismissal.
    (b) If you wish to proceed with a hearing after you received a 
fully favorable revised determination under the prehearing case review 
process in Sec.  404.941, you must follow the procedures in Sec.  
404.941(d) to request that an administrative law judge vacate his or 
her order dismissing your request for a hearing.

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

Subpart N--[Amended]

0
6. The authority citation for subpart N of part 416 continues to read 
as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 702(a)(5), 1631, and 1633 of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 902(a)(5), 1383, and 1383b); sec. 202, Pub. 
L. 108-203, 118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note).


0
7. Amend Sec.  416.1441 by revising paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  416.1441  Prehearing case review.

* * * * *
    (c) Notice of a prehearing revised determination. If we revise the 
determination in a prehearing case review, we will mail a written 
notice of the revised determination to all parties at their last known 
addresses. We will state the basis for the revised determination and 
advise all parties of the effect of the revised determination on the 
request for a hearing.
    (d) Effect of a fully favorable revised determination. If the 
revised determination is fully favorable to you, we will tell you in 
the notice that an administrative law judge will dismiss the request 
for a hearing. We will also tell you that you or another party to the 
hearing may request that the administrative law judge vacate the 
dismissal and reinstate the request for a hearing if you or another 
party to the hearing disagrees with the revised determination for any 
reason. If you wish to make this request, you must do so in writing and 
send it to us within 60 days of the date you receive notice of the 
dismissal. If the request is timely, an administrative law judge will 
vacate the dismissal, reinstate the request for a hearing, and offer 
you and all parties an opportunity for a hearing. The administrative 
law judge will extend the time limit if you show that you had good 
cause for missing the deadline. The administrative law judge will use 
the standards in Sec.  416.1411 to determine whether you had good 
cause.
    (e) Effect of a partially favorable revised determination. If the 
revised determination is partially favorable to you, we will tell you 
in the notice what was not favorable. We will also tell you that an 
administrative law judge will hold the hearing you requested unless you 
and all other parties to the hearing agree in writing to dismiss the 
request for a hearing. An administrative law judge will dismiss the 
request for a hearing if we receive the written statement(s) agreeing 
to dismiss the request for a hearing before an

[[Page 65371]]

administrative law judge mails a notice of his or her hearing decision.

0
8. Amend Sec.  416.1442 by revising paragraphs (d), (e) introductory 
text, (e)(1), and (f)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  416.1442  Prehearing proceedings and decisions by attorney 
advisors.

* * * * *
    (d) Notice of a decision by an attorney advisor. If an attorney 
advisor issues a fully favorable decision under this section, we will 
mail a written notice of the decision to all parties at their last 
known addresses. We will state the basis for the decision and advise 
all parties that they may request that an administrative law judge 
reinstate the request for a hearing if they disagree with the decision 
for any reason. Any party who wants to make this request must do so in 
writing and send it to us within 60 days of the date he or she receives 
notice of the decision. The administrative law judge will extend the 
time limit if the requestor shows good cause for missing the deadline. 
The administrative law judge will use the standards in Sec.  416.1411 
to determine whether there is good cause. If the request is timely, an 
administrative law judge will reinstate the request for a hearing and 
offer all parties an opportunity for a hearing.
    (e) Effect of an attorney advisor's decision. An attorney advisor's 
decision under this section is binding unless--
    (1) You or another party to the hearing submits a timely request 
that an administrative law judge reinstate the request for a hearing 
under paragraph (d) of this section;
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (3) Make the decision of an attorney advisor under paragraph (d) of 
this section subject to review by the Appeals Council if the Appeals 
Council decides to review the decision of the attorney advisor anytime 
within 60 days after the date of the decision under Sec.  416.1469.
* * * * *

0
9. Amend Sec.  416.1448 by revising the second sentence of paragraph 
(a), and paragraph (b)(1)(ii), to read as follows:


Sec.  416.1448  Deciding a case without an oral hearing before an 
administrative law judge.

    (a) Decision fully favorable. * * * The notice of the decision will 
state that you have the right to an oral hearing and to examine the 
evidence on which the administrative law judge based the decision.
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) You live outside the United States, you do not inform us that 
you wish to appear, and there are no other parties who wish to appear.
* * * * *

0
10. Revise Sec.  416.1460 to read as follows:


Sec.  416.1460  Vacating a dismissal of a request for a hearing before 
an administrative law judge.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, an 
administrative law judge or the Appeals Council may vacate a dismissal 
of a request for a hearing if you request that we vacate the dismissal. 
If you or another party wish to make this request, you must do so 
within 60 days of the date you receive notice of the dismissal, and you 
must state why our dismissal of your request for a hearing was 
erroneous. The administrative law judge or Appeals Council will inform 
you in writing of the action taken on your request. The Appeals Council 
may also vacate a dismissal of a request for a hearing on its own 
motion. If the Appeals Council decides to vacate a dismissal on its own 
motion, it will do so within 60 days of the date we mail the notice of 
dismissal and will inform you in writing that it vacated the dismissal.
    (b) If you wish to proceed with a hearing after you received a 
fully favorable revised determination under the prehearing case review 
process in Sec.  416.1441, you must follow the procedures in Sec.  
416.1441(d) to request that an administrative law judge vacate his or 
her order dismissing your request for a hearing.

[FR Doc. 2011-27236 Filed 10-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191-02-P