Group I, Category 53 Insufficient Vocational Documentation to Determine Work History
ISSUE
DDS determined the claimant is disabled at step 5 of sequential evaluation, without first completing step 4. A review of the case file shows there is insufficient vocational evidence to make a vocational decision.
CASE DISCUSSION & POLICY ANALYSIS (INCLUDING SPECIFIC REFERENCES)
This 59 year-old claimant is filing a DIB claim alleging disability since 01/20/2010 due to depression, borderline intellectual functioning, borderline diabetes, hypertension, morbid obesity, sleep apnea, migraines, spine issues, glaucoma, and asthma.
There is a prior ALJ denial dated 04/10/2013. The ALJ determined the claimant retained the capability of returning …show more content…
On the SSA 3369 in the current file she listed this job as “Floater” for national semiconductor. The job is adequately described to determine she cannot perform the job as actually performed. She describes her job as assembling wafers, placed them in machines, lifted boxes of wafers, put wafers in acid or solvent to clean them, did paperwork on the computer to record the work, did data entry on the computer for inventory control. DDS determined her job is equivalent to DOT 590.684-042 integrated circuit fabricator. The description for this job involves loading wafers into processing containers; cleaning wafers; inspecting wafers for defects; depositing layer of photoresist on wafers using automated equipment; aligning photo mask patter on photoresist layer; exposes patter to ultraviolent light, and develops pattern, using specialized equipment; alters electrical nature of wafer layers according to photo mask patters to form integrated circuits on wafers; inspects and measures circuitry for conformance to patter specifications; tests functioning of circuitry.
It is not clear if this is the best counterpart in the DOT. She did not describe performing most of these job duties. More details about how the claimant performed her job is needed in order to identify the best match or matches in the DOT. DI 25005.020A indicates that it is not permissible to use DOT information about work requirements as a measure
ISSUE
DDS determined the claimant is disabled at step 5 of sequential evaluation, without first completing step 4. A review of the case file shows there is insufficient vocational evidence to make a vocational decision.
CASE DISCUSSION & POLICY ANALYSIS (INCLUDING SPECIFIC REFERENCES)
This 59 year-old claimant is filing a DIB claim alleging disability since 01/20/2010 due to depression, borderline intellectual functioning, borderline diabetes, hypertension, morbid obesity, sleep apnea, migraines, spine issues, glaucoma, and asthma.
There is a prior ALJ denial dated 04/10/2013. The ALJ determined the claimant retained the capability of returning …show more content…
On the SSA 3369 in the current file she listed this job as “Floater” for national semiconductor. The job is adequately described to determine she cannot perform the job as actually performed. She describes her job as assembling wafers, placed them in machines, lifted boxes of wafers, put wafers in acid or solvent to clean them, did paperwork on the computer to record the work, did data entry on the computer for inventory control. DDS determined her job is equivalent to DOT 590.684-042 integrated circuit fabricator. The description for this job involves loading wafers into processing containers; cleaning wafers; inspecting wafers for defects; depositing layer of photoresist on wafers using automated equipment; aligning photo mask patter on photoresist layer; exposes patter to ultraviolent light, and develops pattern, using specialized equipment; alters electrical nature of wafer layers according to photo mask patters to form integrated circuits on wafers; inspects and measures circuitry for conformance to patter specifications; tests functioning of circuitry.
It is not clear if this is the best counterpart in the DOT. She did not describe performing most of these job duties. More details about how the claimant performed her job is needed in order to identify the best match or matches in the DOT. DI 25005.020A indicates that it is not permissible to use DOT information about work requirements as a measure