[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 27, 1999)] [Notices] [Page 57919] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 99-28018] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Rescission of Social Security Acquiescence Ruling 97-1(1) AGENCY: Social Security Administration. ACTION: Notice of rescission of Social Security Acquiescence Ruling 97- 1(1)--Parisi By Cooney v. Chater, 69 F.3d 614 (1st Cir. 1995). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: In accordance with 20 CFR 404.985(e) and 402.35(b)(2), the Commissioner of Social Security gives notice of the rescission of Social Security Acquiescence Ruling 97-1(1). EFFECTIVE DATE: October 27, 1999. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Sargent, Litigation Staff, Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235, (410) 965-1695. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Social Security Acquiescence Ruling explains how we will apply a holding in a decision of a United States Court of Appeals that we determine conflicts with our interpretation of a provision of the Social Security Act or regulations when the Government has decided not to seek further review of the case or is unsuccessful on further review. As provided by 20 CFR 404.985(e)(4) a Social Security Acquiescence Ruling may be rescinded as obsolete if we subsequently clarify, modify or revoke the regulation or ruling that was the subject of the circuit court holding for which the Acquiescence Ruling was issued. On January 13, 1997, we issued Acquiescence Ruling 97-1(1) to reflect the holding in Parisi By Cooney v. Chater, 69 F.3d 614 (1st Cir. 1995), that the Social Security Administration (SSA), when computing a family maximum reduction pursuant to section 203(a) of the Social Security Act, should not include the monthly benefit that would otherwise be payable to a spouse entitled on the earnings record of a worker if payment of that spouse's benefit is precluded by section 202(k)(3)(A) of the Act due to the spouse's entitlement to a higher benefit on the spouse's own earnings record. The court also held that the statutory language of section 203(a) requires SSA to consider the actual amount of benefits payable under the relevant benefit provisions, not purely theoretical entitlements, in calculating the total monthly benefits payable on the worker's earnings record under the family maximum. Concurrent with the rescission of this Ruling, we are publishing our final rules amending section 404.403 of Social Security Regulations No. 4 (20 CFR 404.403) to change the method for computing the family maximum benefit reduction when a beneficiary has dual entitlement on a another earnings record. The final rules provide in paragraph 404.403(a)(5) that, when benefits are subject to reduction for both the family maximum and dual entitlement, we consider only the amount of benefits actually due or payable to the person with dual entitlement on the same earnings record when calculating the reduction under the family maximum. Because the change in the regulations adopts the Parisi court's holding on a nationwide basis, we are rescinding Acquiescence Ruling 97-1(1). (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) Dated: October 20, 1999. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security. [FR Doc. 99-28018 Filed 10-26-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P