§220.178. Determining medical improvement and its relationship to the annuitant's ability to do work. — Inbound Citations

(a) The claimant's impairment(s), and any related symptoms, such as pain, may cause physical and mental limitations that affect what the claimant can do in a work setting. The claimant's residual functional capacity is what the claimant can still do despite the claimant's limitations. If the claimant has more than one impairment, the Board will consider all of the claimant's impairment(s) of which the Board is aware. The Board will consider the claimant's ability to meet certain demands of jobs, such as physical demands, mental demands, sensory requirements, and other functions, as described in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section. Residual functional capacity is an assessment based upon all of the relevant evidence. It may include descriptions (even the claimant's own) of limitations that go beyond the symptoms, such as pain, that are important in the diagnosis and treatment of the claimant's medical condition. Observations by the claimant's treating or examining physicians or psychologists, the claimant's family, neighbors, friends, or other persons, of the claimant's limitations, in addition to those observations usually made during formal medical examinations, may also be used. These descriptions and observations, when used, must be considered along with the claimant's medical records to enable us to decide to what extent the claimant's impairment(s) keeps the claimant from performing particular work activities. This assessment of the claimant's remaining capacity for work is not a decision on whether the claimant is disabled, but is used as the basis for determining the particular types of work the claimant may be able to do despite the claimant's impairment(s). Then, using the guidelines in §§ 220.125 and 220.134 of this part the claimant's vocational background is considered along with the claimant's residual functional capacity in arriving at a disability determination or decision. In deciding whether the claimant's disability continues or ends, the residual functional capacity assessment may also be used to determine whether any medical improvement the claimant has experienced is related to the claimant's ability to work as discussed in § 220.178 of this part.

(e) If the Board found at step (c) that there has been no medical improvement or if it found at step (d) that the medical improvement is not related to the annuitant's ability to work, the Board considers whether any of the exceptions in § 220.178 apply. If none of them apply, disability will be found to continue. If one of the first group of exceptions to medical improvement applies, see step (f). If an exception from the second group of exceptions to medical improvement applies, disability will be found to have ended. The second group of exceptions to medical improvement may be considered at any point in this process;

(1) There has been medical improvement in the annuitant's impairments related to the ability to work and the annuitant has the capacity to engage in substantial gainful work under the rules set out in §§ 220.177 and 220.178; or

The definition and discussion of disability for any regular employment are found in §§ 220.26 through 220.184.

(f) The Board's decisions under this section will be made on a neutral basis without any initial inference as to the presence or absence of disability being drawn from the fact that the annuitant had previously been determined to be disabled. The Board will consider all of the evidence the annuitant submits. An annuitant must give the Board reports from his or her physician, psychologist, or others who have treated or evaluated him or her, as well as any other evidence that will help the board determine if he or she is still disabled (see § 220.45). The annuitant must have a good reason for not giving the Board this information or the Board may find that his or her disability has ended (see § 220.178(b)(2)). If the Board asks the annuitant, he or she must contact his or her medical sources to help the Board get the medical reports. The Board will make every reasonable effort to help the annuitant in getting medical reports when he or she gives the Board permission to request them from his or her physician, psychologist, or other medical sources, Every reasonable effort means that the Board will make an initial request and, after 20 days, one follow-up request to the annuitant's medical source to obtain the medical evidence necessary to make a determination before the Board evaluates medical evidence obtained from another source on a consultative basis. The medical source will have 10 days from the follow-up to reply (unless experience indicates that a longer period is advisable in a particular case). In some instances the Board may order a consultative examination while awaiting receipt of medical source evidence. Before deciding that an annuitant's disability has ended, the Board will develop a complete medical history covering at least the preceding 12 months (See § 220.45(b)). A consultative examination may be purchased when the Board needs additional evidence to determine whether or not an annuitant's disability continues. As a result, the Board may ask the annuitant, upon the Board request and reasonable notice, to undergo consultative examinations and tests to help the Board determine whether the annuitant is still disabled (see § 220.50). The Board will decide whether or not to purchase a consultative examination in accordance with the standards in §§ 220.53 through 220.54.

(c) As used in this section—

Medical improvement expected diary— refers to a case which is scheduled for review at a later date because the individual's impairment(s) is expected to improve. Generally, the diary period is set for not less than 6 months or for not more than 18 months. Examples of cases likely to be scheduled for a medical improvement excepted diary are fractures and cases in which corrective surgery is planned and recovery can be anticipated. The term “medical improvement expected diary” also includes a case which is scheduled for a review at a later date because the individual is undergoing vocational therapy, training or an educational program which may improve his or her ability to work so that the disability requirement of the law is no longer met. Generally, the diary period will be the length of the training, therapy, or program of education.

Permanent impairment medical improvement not expected—refers to a case in which any medical improvement in the person's impairment(s) is not expected. This means an extremely severe condition determined on the basis of our experience in administering the disability program to be at least static, but more likely to be progressively disabling either by itself or by reason of impairment complications, and unlikely to improve so as to permit the individual to engage in substantial gainful activity. The interaction of the individual's age, impairment consequences and lack of recent attachment to the labor market may also be considered in determining whether an impairment is permanent. Improvement which is considered temporary under § 220.178(c)(3), will not be considered in deciding if an impairment is permanent. Examples of permanent impairments are as follows and are not intended to be all inclusive:

(1) Parkinsonian syndrome with significant rigidity, brady kinesia, or tremor in two extremities, which, singly or in combination, result in sustained disturbance of gross and dexterous movements, or gait and station.

(2) Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, based on documentation of a clinically appropriate medical history, neurological findings consistent with the diagnosis of ALS, and the results of any electrophysiological and neuroimaging testing.

(3) Diffuse pulmonary fibrosis in an individual age 55 or older which reduces FEV1 to 1.45 to 2.05 (L, BTPS) or less depending on the individual's height.

(4) Nonpermanent impairment refers to a case in which any medical improvement in the person's impairment(s) is possible. This means an impairment for which improvement cannot be predicted based on current experience and the facts of the particular case but which is not at the level of severity of an impairment that is considered permanent. Examples of nonpermanent impairments are: regional enteritis, hyperthyroidism, and chronic ulcerative colitis.