Comment from Brown, Mark, Association of Administrative Law Judges

This new reg sets out policy SSA will use if a person "poses a threat" to the safety of employees or other participants in the hearing. Twice in the Preamble, and twice more in the regulation itself at (b)(1), the phrase "poses a threat" or "poses a reasonable threat" is used. But this phrase is then mutated to "has made a threat" in the ultimate operative clause, which implies that a current threat must have been uttered for this regulation to apply. So, "has made a threat" should be changed back to "poses a threat" for consistency, and to allow consideration of other realities in this person's background which could not be used unless a present threat had been uttered. For example, there could be a past history of: threats or assaults on SSA employees in earlier applications for benefits; criminal convictions for assaults or weapons crimes; destruction of SSA property; or threats to non-SSA agencies or other government officials. The new sentence should read: "The Hearing Office Chief Administrative Law Judge will find that a claimant or other individual poses a reasonable threat to the safety of our employees or other participants in the hearing when he or she determines that the individual POSES A THREAT and there is a reasonable likelihood that the claimant or other individual could act on the threat." Sec. (b)(2)(i) should be clarified to change the word "at". It should read: "Require the presence of a security guard IN THE HEARING ROOM; or" The use of "at" could be read to mean the guard can merely be outside the door of the hearing room. Eliminate this uncertainty.