WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Angus King (I-Maine) sent a letter to the Social Security Administration (SSA) expressing support for the agency’s effort to reduce the considerable wait times that people with disabilities experience when applying for programs that can help them support themselves and, when possible, reenter the workforce. In his letter, which is part of his ongoing effort to support Americans with disabilities, Senator King also offered several suggestions as to how the administration can improve their proposal.

“Many people spend the application period for disability benefits impoverished, at risk of failing health, and facing an uncertain future. […] This delay can cause significant adversity for people who are waiting,” said Senator King in his letter. “Should SSA account for the concerns that I have outlined above, I believe that a final rule based on this NPRM will be a valuable step forward. I look forward to continuing to work with you to improve the disability review process so that people with work-limiting disabilities are treated fairly and their applications are handled efficiently.”

The SSA is currently working on a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to improve the procedures used to review applicants for the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs. SSDI and SSI provide critical support for people with disabilities in Maine and around the country, but unfortunately, applicants often face substantial wait times that cause hardship and uncertainty. For example, the average wait time for applicants in Maine 15.5 months from the time they request an appeals hearing at the Portland SSA hearing office to the date that it takes place.

Several of the proposals included in the NPRM were similar to suggestions made by Senator King in a 2015 disability whitepaper. However, Senator King urged SSA to adjust some of those proposals to promote a faster appeals process and increase efficiency. For instance, Senator King has suggested a 75-day advance hearing notice for SSDI and SSI applicants along with a requirement that applicants submit evidence of their disability at least five days before their hearing. While the NPRM mirrors Senator King’s proposals in several ways – including a 60-day advance hearing notice – Senator King believes slight adjustments should be made to strengthen the impact of the proposed changes. Those suggested adjustments include changing the 60-day notice to 75 days, and including a good-cause exemption to the 5-day pre-hearing evidence submission requirement for applicants that is clearly defined, consistently enforced, and applied to the full range of submissions.

Senator King’s letter today follows a disability roundtable last summer where he heard directly from Mainers, after which he has worked with SSA to improve the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs. He published a whitepaper last November with his proposals to help Mainers with disabilities enter the workforce.

The letter is available HERE and the full text is below:

+++

November 16, 2016

The Honorable Carolyn W. Colvin

Acting Commissioner

Social Security Administration

6401 Security Boulevard

Baltimore, MD 21235

Dear Acting Commissioner Colvin:

I write today to offer feedback on the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that would revise procedures used in SSA’s administrative review of applications to the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs. It is clear that changes must be made to the application process for these programs to improve the timeliness of determinations, so I appreciate the intent of the NPRM (SSA-2014-0052) to improve and standardize the operation of appeals hearings and Appeals Council reviews nationwide.

Maine has a particular interest in the NPRM, not only because it would mark a nationwide rollout of some of the procedures currently being tested in SSA’s Region I—which encompasses New England—but also because of the substantial wait times that Maine SSDI applicants experience. Claimants with substantial disabilities should not be forced to wait months or years for a final determination of their eligibility. Many people spend the application period for disability benefits impoverished, at risk of failing health, and facing an uncertain future. 

Applicants in Maine wait an average of 15.5 months from the time they request an appeals hearing at the Portland SSA hearing office to the date that it takes place.[1] This delay can cause significant adversity for people who are waiting, as successful SSDI applicants have little to no earnings during the application process. Compounding this hardship is the fact that the hearing is only one part of a multi-stage determination process that can stretch for well over a year, if not longer. 

Because of these lengthy application processing times and the high rate of SSDI receipt in Maine, last fall I held a roundtable in Maine to discuss improvements to the SSDI program and I subsequently released a whitepaper that proposes a set of policy changes, including some of those in the NPRM. One of the proposals common to the NPRM and the whitepaper is to increase the amount of advance notice provided to applicants about hearings before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), in an effort to provide applicants ample time to assemble medical evidence prior to their hearing. While I was glad to see this provision included in the NPRM, I hope that a final rule will include a 75-day advance notice, rather than the 60-day notice that SSA has proposed. Both the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Disability Insurance Working Group[2] and ALJs and Hearing Office Directors surveyed by the Administrative Conference of the United States[3] support adopting the 75-day notice policy that has been piloted in Region I, so I respectfully request that SSA consider this feedback and adopt a nationwide 75-day notice requirement in the final rule.

Another aspect of the NPRM that is largely in line with what I proposed in my whitepaper is the plan to encourage applicants’ submission of evidence at least five business days prior to an appeals hearing. Applying this rule nationwide should, in tandem with the 75-day advance notice requirement discussed above, lead to evidentiary records that are more complete on the hearing date, thereby improving the fairness and efficiency of the adjudicative process. SSA must ensure, however, that the final version of this requirement is structured so that applicants who are unable to provide evidence in advance of the deadline due to reasons outside their control—e.g., status as an unrepresented claimant or delayed responses from medical providers to timely record requests—are not denied the chance to have the full slate of relevant evidence accounted for in the appeals process.

Additionally, given feedback provided both by ALJs[4] and claimant representatives[5] in Maine about uneven enforcement of the rule during the Region I pilot, both the general parameters of the five-day rule and the bounds of the good cause exception must be clearly defined in the final rule so that ALJs will apply them consistently within and across hearing offices and regions. This exception should also be included in the proposed five-day rule for written statements, as it is reportedly not uncommon for SSA to have yet to mark submitted evidence as exhibits in advance of the five-day deadline, which hinders representatives’ ability to draft a constructive statement.[6] For the sake of consistency, it would be worthwhile to provide the exception for subpoena requests and objections as well. The five-day rule can, if it includes adequate exceptions and is evenly enforced, improve the efficiency of the adjudication process while protecting the rights of claimants.

I support your agency’s efforts to promote a faster appeals process that improves administrative efficiency while remaining fair. Should SSA account for the concerns that I have outlined above, I believe that a final rule based on this NPRM will be a valuable step forward. I look forward to continuing to work with you to improve the disability review process so that people with work-limiting disabilities are treated fairly and their applications are handled efficiently. Should you have any questions about this letter, please direct your staff to contact Aisha Woodward or Will Woodworth in my office at 202-224-5344.

Sincerely,

###