excess of 13 weeks' duration. However, she must further satisfy the hours per week requirement to qualify as a student under the plan of study selected in this instance. The X College of Medical Assistants, licensed and approved under State law as an institution of learning, while not qualifying in a technical and legal sense as a "college," may nevertheless be denominated under the regulations as "any other educational institution." The Cyclopedic Law Dictionary, 3d Ed., defines "college" as "An educational institution of the highest class." It is further defined, in Webster's New World Dictionary, College Edition, as "that division of a university which offers a general four year course leading to the bachelor's degree: distinguished from the graduate and professional schools." C's course of training, therefore, appears best described as that of a technical or a vocational school. By definition, such a school must meet the 20-hour per week requirement of attendance. Since C's scheduled hours of instruction totaled but 15 hours per week from September 1967 through February 1968, it follows that C did not meet the "full-time attendance" requirement for such period. This requirement is further illustrated in the case of Haberman v. Gardner, U.S.D.C., S.D.N.Y. (1/3/69) (SSR 69-33c, C.B. 1969, p. 12), involving a student enrolled in a fully accredited college preparatory program where her schedule called for 161⁄2 hours of class work per week. It was there held that claimant did not meet the full-time attendance provisions of the regulations so as to qualify as a full-time student under section 202 (d) of the Act. The court stated: The Congress left the determination of what constitutes "full-time attendance" under the statute to the Secretary. The legislative history of this 1965 amendment shows that the Congress intended that it be liberally construedbut it recognized the need for the establishment of minimum standards which would, of necessity, be national and impartial in scope and application. Accordingly, since C's scheduled attendance was at the rate of less than 20 hours per week, even though the course was of more than 13 weeks' duration, held she was not in full-time attendance during the school term as required by the regulations, and not a "full-time student" within the meaning of the Act for entitlement to child's insurance benefits. SECTION 202(d) (8).—CHILD'S INSURANCE BENEFITS-FULL-TIME ATTENDANCE AT TRADE OR VOCATIONAL SCHOOL-20-HOUR PER WEEK REQUIREMENT 20 CFR 404.320 (c) (2) SSR 67-50 Where the 20-year-old child of an insured worker enrolled on a full-time basis under the school's standards and practices in a vocational school approved by a State agency, and was scheduled to attend classes for more than 20 hours per week for more than 13 weeks, and filed application for child's insurance benefits under the student provisions of the Social Security Act as amended, held since the child's scheduled attendance was at the rate of not less than 20 hours per week in a course of not less than 13 weeks' duration, she was in "full-time attendance" at the school within the meaning of section 404.320 (c) (2) of Social Security Administration Regulations No. 4 and accordingly, she is a "full-time student" within the meaning of the Act and is entitled to child's insurance benefits for the months of school attendance. C, age 20, enrolled in a State-approved vocational school and was scheduled to attend classes at a rate considered full-time under the school's standards and practices. C's course, moreover, consisted of classes which were scheduled for not less than 20 hours a week and exceeded 13 weeks in duration. Having met all other requirements for entitlement to child's insurance benefits as a student under section 202(d) (8) of the Act, the sole issue for consideration is whether C was in full-time attendance at the vocational school within the meaning of section 202 (d) (8) (A) of the Act and section 404.320 (c) (2) of Social Security Administration Regulations No. 4 (20 CFR 404.320(c) (2)). Section 202(d) (8) (A) of the Act provides, as pertinent here, that: A "full-time student" is an individual who is in full-time attendance as a student at an educational institution, as determined by the Secretary (in accordance with regulations prescribed by him) in the light of the standards and practices of the institutions involved Section 404.320 (c) (2) of the Social Security Administration Regulations No. 4 (20 CFR 404.320 (c) (2)) defines full-time attendance as follows: Ordinarily, a student is in “full-time attendance” at an educational institution if he is enrolled in a noncorrespondence course and is carrying a subject load which is considered full-time for day students under the institution's standards and practices. However, a student will not be considered in "full-time attendance" (i) if he is enrolled in a junior college, college, or university in a course of study of less than 13 school weeks' duration, or (ii) if he is enrolled in any other educational institution and either the course of study is less than 13 school weeks' duration or his scheduled attendance is at the rate of less than 20 hours a week. *. (Emphasis supplied.) C is subject to the provision in section 404.320 (c) (2) (ii) of the Social Security Administration Regulations No. 4, supra. She had enrolled in an educational institution other than a junior college, college, or university (i.e., a vocational school). The duration of her course was 13 months which exceeded the 13-weeks' duration required for a course in a vocational school. Moreover, her scheduled weekly attendance was considered full time under the school's standards and practices, was for at least 20 hours per week and during certain portions of her training exceeded such minimum require ment. Accordingly, it is held that C was in "full-time attendance" during the months in question and therefore she was a "full-time student" within the meaning of section 202(d) (8) of the Act. She is, therefore, entitled to child's insurance benefits for all such months. SECTION 202(d).-CHILD'S INSURANCE BENEFITS FULL-TIME STUDENT-JOB CORPS ENROLLEE SSR 66-36 Where an insured worker's child between the ages of 18 through 21 enrolled on a full-time basis in the Job Corps, under which program he must attend a Job Corps Training Camp or Center for which he is paid by the Government, and where such enrollee is deemed, under the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, to be an employee of the United States for purposes of title II of the Social Security Act, held, such enrollee is paid by his employer while attending school pursuant to a requirement of the employer; hence, he is not a "full-time student" within the meaning of section 202 (d) (8) (A) of the Social Security Act, and is therefore not entitled to child's insurance benefits. C, born March 23, 1946, became entitled to child's insurance benefits effective August 1960 upon the death of his father. He continued to receive such benefits until he attained age 18 in March 1964, when benefits were terminated in accordance with section 202(d) (1) of the Social Security Act, as then in effect. On June 24, 1965, C enrolled in the Job Corps for a period of two years and was still in attendance at one of its training sites in September 1965. He filed application on September 18, 1965, for reentitlement to child's insurance benefits as a "full-time student." The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-452), enacted on August 20, 1964, established the Job Corps Program as one of the youth programs authorized by the Congress. Its purpose is to increase the employability of youth between ages 16 through 21 by providing educational facilities, vocational training, and useful work experience, including work directed toward the conservation of natural resources, and other appropriate activities. The Act also provides that the enrollees shall be entitled to certain allowances for travel, clothing, room and board, readjustment, and spending money. Section 202 (d) (7) of the Social Security Act, as amended by P.L. 89–97 (the Social Security Amendments of 1965), provides, as pertinent here, that a child who was previously entitled to a child's insurance benefit shall be re-entitled to such benefit if (among other requirements not here at issue) he is a full-time student and has not attained the age of 22. The term "full-time student," as defined in section 202(d) (8) (A) of the Act, is an individual who is in full-time attendance as a student at an educational institution, as determined by the Secretary in the light of the standards and practices of the institution involved, except that no individual shall be considered a “full-time student" if he is paid by his employer while attending an educational institution at the request, or pursuant to a requirement, of his employer. (Emphasis supplied.) Section 202 (d) (8) of the Act further provides, in pertinent part, that: * * (C) An "educational institution" is (i) a school or college or university operated or directly supported by the United States, or by any State or local government or political subdivision thereof Since the Job Corps Center is an educational and training facility directly supported by the Federal Government, it is an "educational institution" within the meaning of section 202 (d) (8) (C) (i), above. Thus, since C is in full-time attendance as a student at an educational institution, has not attained age 22, and meets all other requirements for re-entitlement to child's insurance benefits, the question presented is whether he may be considered a "full-time student" for social security purposes despite the fact that he is being paid by the Federal Government while attending the Job Corps center. If C does not meet the definition of “full-· time student," he cannot be re-entitled to child's insurance benefits. Section 106(b) of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 further provides that: Enrollees [in the Job Corps] shall be deemed to be employees of the United States for the purposes * ** of title II of the Social Security Act * and any service performed by an individual as an enrollee shall be deemed for such purposes to be performed in the employ of the United States. In this case, C must attend the Job Corps Center as a condition of employment for which he is paid in cash and in kind by the Federal Government. Further, under section 106(b) of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, he is deemed to be an employee of the Federal Government. Consequently, C is paid by his employer, the Federal Government, while attending an educational institution pursuant to a requirement of his employer. Accordingly, it is held that C is not a "full-time student" within the meaning of section 202(d) (8) (A) of the Social Security Act, and therefore he is not entitled to child's insurance benefits. SECTION 202 (d).-CHILD'S INSURANCE BENEFITS "FULL-TIME TECHNICAL SSR 67-49 Where the 20-year-old child of an insured worker is enrolled on a full-time basis in a school which is accredited by a nationally-recognized accrediting agency and thus is an "educational institution" for social security purposes; where his curriculum includes in addition to classroom work, in-service training; and while in attendance he receives a stipend, held, the child is a "full-time student" under a work-study program of the school, and the exclusion in section 202(d) (8) (A) of the Act (under which a student paid by his employer while attending school at the request or pursuant to a requirement of the employer cannot be considered a "full-time student") is not applicable and does not preclude his entitlement to child's insurance benefits. C, age 20, enrolled September 8, 1964, as a trainee in the School of X-Ray Technology, a training facility operated by Y Hospital. This school is approved by the Council on Medical Education and Hospitals of the American Medical Association, which is a nationally-recognized accrediting agency. The course lasts 2 years and the schedule includes classroom work plus in-service training totalling approximately 40 hours each week. Upon successful completion of the course, the student receives a certificate, and is eligible to take a statewide written examination to become a licensed X-ray technician. While the student is in training, he is paid by the hospital at the following rates: for the first 6 months, he receives $25 each month; for the next 6 months, $50 each month; for the third 6 months, $100 each month; and for the last 6 months, $150 each month. On September 10, 1965, C filed application for child's insurance benefits on the earnings record of his deceased father. Section 202 (d) (1) of the Act as amended by P.L. 89-97 on July 30, 1965, provides in pertinent part that a child of an individual who died a fully or currently insured individual shall be entitled to child's insurance benefits if such child has filed application, at the time of application is unmarried, is a "full-time student" who has not attained the age of 22, and if he was dependent upon the insured individual at the time of his death. The payment of benefits to a child-student is effective no earlier than January 1965, on the basis of an application filed in or after July 1965. A "full-time student," as defined in section 202(d) (8) (A) of the Act, is an individual who is in full-time attendance as a student at an educational institution, as determined by the Secretary * in the light of the standards and practices of the institutions involved, except that no individual shall be considered a “full-time student” if he is paid by his employer while attending an educational institution at the request, or pursuant to a requirement, of his employer. (Emphasis supplied.) Section 202 (d) (8) of the Act further provides, in pertinent part, that: (C) An "educational institution" is * * (ii) a school or college or university which has been approved by a State or accredited by a State-recognized or nationally-recognized accrediting agency or body Since the School of X-Ray Technology is approved by a nationally-recog nized accrediting agency (the Council on Medical Education and Hospitals of the American Medical Association), it is an "educational institution" within the meaning of section 202(d) (8) (C) (ii), supra. Thus, since C is in full-time attendance as a student at an educational institution, and meets all other requirements for child's insurance benefits, the question to be resolved is whether the definition in section 202(d) (8) (A) of the Act precludes him from being a "full-time student" because he is paid while he is in training. If C is so precluded by such definition, he cannot be entitled to child's insurance benefits. At the time C filed his application for benefits (September 1965) he was in the third phase of his training and consequently received $100 per month. Although he was paid for services performed under conditions similarly found in an employment relationship, it is the school in which he is enrolled, and not an employer, that requires him to perform the services as an integral part of the school's training program. Thus, the situation here is the converse of that contemplated in the exclusion in section 202(d) (8) (A), which applies where the student "is paid by his employer while attending school at the request, or pursuant to a requirement, of his employer." Consequently, where, as here, the student's employment is integrated with his training in a work-study program required by the school, the exclusion is not applicable. Accordingly, it is held that C is a "full-time student" and, therefore, is entitled to child's insurance benefits beginning with January 1965. |