SSR 64-13: Rescinded

Rescinded January 21, 2026 by Federal Register FR Vol. 91, No. 13, page 2581 .

SSR 64-13

A worker, R, who had become totally and irremediably deaf, filed

application for, and was awarded, disability insurance benefits beginning

March 1963, when he was 31 years old. R has no physical or mental

impairment other than his deafness.

In accordance with section 222(a) of the Social Security Act, the

Administration had referred R for necessary rehabilitation services to the

agency of his State administering the State Plan for such services

approved under the Vocational Rehabilitation Act. In July 1963, this

agency wrote to R requesting him to report to its office, so that an

evaluation of his rehabilitation potential could be made and appropriate

services offered. R initially notified the agency that he was not

interested in its services. However, he agreed to accept rehabilitation

services after being informed that no disability insurance benefits could

be paid for any month in which he refused without good cause to accept

such services.

Later in the same month (July 1963) R was visited by a rehabilitation

counselor from the agency, who explained vocational rehabilitation

services to him and again offered him the opportunity to be evaluated for

such services. The counselor advised R there was a good chance that, with

vocational rehabilitation, R could be restored to employability in any of

several occupations, one of which would be selected after necessary tests

and counseling. R told the counselor that he was a pipe coverer by trade

and would not accept training for any other type of work. He stated

further that he would accept a job as a pipe coverer, but only at wages of

at least $2.25 per hour and with a "lifetime guarantee" of employment. In

addition, he specified that the employment must be within or close to his

home town

ecessary tests

and counseling. R told the counselor that he was a pipe coverer by trade

and would not accept training for any other type of work. He stated

further that he would accept a job as a pipe coverer, but only at wages of

at least $2.25 per hour and with a "lifetime guarantee" of employment. In

addition, he specified that the employment must be within or close to his

home town. The counselor explained that his agency could not promise to

find such work for R, but would be glad to proceed with services necessary

for vocational rehabilitation if and when R notified the agency that he

was willing to accept such services. R took no further step toward

utilizing the services of the agency.

Section 222(b) of the Act deals with deductions where an individual who

is entitled either to disability insurance benefits, or to child's

insurance benefits for a month in which he is age 18 or older, refuses to

accept vocational rehabilitation services. For each month in which a

person entitled to disability insurance benefits refuses, without good

cause, to accept rehabilitation services available to him under a State

plan approved under the Federal Vocational Rehabilitation Act, his benefit

is subject, under section 222(b), to a deduction equal to the amount of

the benefit, thus precluding any payment. In addition, a deduction must be

imposed, precluding payment for such month of any wife's, husband's or

child's benefit based on his earnings record.

The issue is whether R has refused without "good cause" to accept

vocational rehabilitation services.

tation Act, his benefit

is subject, under section 222(b), to a deduction equal to the amount of

the benefit, thus precluding any payment. In addition, a deduction must be

imposed, precluding payment for such month of any wife's, husband's or

child's benefit based on his earnings record.

The issue is whether R has refused without "good cause" to accept

vocational rehabilitation services.

The term "vocational rehabilitation services" includes, as a necessary

prerequisite to any actual training or rehabilitation, the diagnostic and

related services designed to determine a person's eligibility for

vocational rehabilitation and the nature and scope of the services to be

provided him. A beneficiary who refuses to permit an evaluation of his

eligibility for training or other services necessary to restore his

employability is therefore considered to have refused vocational

rehabilitation services. In the absence of "good cause," such refusal

requires deductions under section 222(b). The deductions begin with the

first month in which such refusal occurred, and continue up to (but not

including) the first month thereafter in which the beneficiary accepts in

good faith vocational rehabilitation services offered, or has good cause

for refusal of such services, or in which vocational rehabilitation

services are no longer available to him.

In the instant case, the conditions placed by R upon his cooperation are

unreasonable in view of his youth and general good health. A counter offer

so conditioned, subsequent to R's preemptory refusal of the offer of

services, is equivalent to a refusal of the services without a showing of

good cause.

rvices, or in which vocational rehabilitation

services are no longer available to him.

In the instant case, the conditions placed by R upon his cooperation are

unreasonable in view of his youth and general good health. A counter offer

so conditioned, subsequent to R's preemptory refusal of the offer of

services, is equivalent to a refusal of the services without a showing of

good cause.

Accordingly, it is held that R has refused without good cause to

accept available and approved vocational rehabilitation services; and,

therefore, that his disability insurance benefits are subject to

deductions precluding any payment of such benefits for months beginning

July 1963. Such deductions will continue until the first month in which he

accepts the vocational rehabilitation services offered, or shows good

cause for refusal of such services, or in which the services are no longer

available.