## Facts

- Shirley Harmon applied for supplemental security income in June 1994, alleging disability primarily from severe back pain requiring her to sit or lie down much of the time.
- An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found Harmon retained the residual functional capacity (RFC) to perform light work if allowed to alternate sitting and standing every 30 minutes.
- A vocational expert (VE) identified jobs consistent with the RFC, including retail receiving clerk, gasket inspector, shoe packer, gate tender, hardware assembler, and switchbox assembler.
- The VE testified there were about 900,000 such jobs nationwide and about 700 similar jobs within a 75-mile radius of Harmon’s rural home in Cumberland, Kentucky.
- Harmon did not challenge the RFC finding or the VE’s numerical estimates; she argued that many jobs were in a metropolitan area more than an hour away and commuting would require sitting longer than 30 minutes.
- The Appeals Council denied review, the district court affirmed the Commissioner’s final decision, and Harmon appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported the finding that a significant number of jobs existed that Harmon could perform, given her need to alternate sitting and standing every 30 minutes.
2. Whether the “significant numbers in the national economy” inquiry requires consideration of a claimant’s commuting distance or travel-related sitting limitations.

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit affirmed the judgment upholding the denial of benefits.
- The court held that the VE’s unrebutted testimony about job availability (900,000 nationally and 700 within 75 miles) supported the ALJ’s finding of a significant number of jobs.
- The court rejected Harmon’s argument that jobs should be excluded based on the time or distance she would need to travel to reach them.
- Applying the substantial evidence standard, the court concluded the ALJ’s decision was supported by evidence a reasonable mind could accept and could not be overturned by reweighing the record.

## Legal Principles

- A claimant bears the burden to prove disability; after showing inability to perform past work, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to show other work exists in significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant can perform.
- “Work which exists in the national economy” means work existing in significant numbers either in the region where the claimant lives or in several regions of the country.
- The statutory job-existence inquiry focuses on whether suitable work exists, not on a claimant’s commuting distance, transportation options, or travel convenience.
- VE testimony can constitute substantial evidence supporting the Commissioner’s step-five burden when it identifies jobs consistent with the RFC and provides job-number estimates.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the denial of SSI because substantial evidence showed a significant number of jobs existed that matched Harmon’s RFC, and the Social Security Act does not require adjusting the job-existence analysis for a claimant’s commuting distance or travel burdens.


Harmon v. Apfel, 168 F.3d 289 (6th Cir. 1999)