Wack

MEMORANDUM *

Stephen Wack appeals the district court’s affirmance of the Social Security Commissioner’s denial of his application for disability insurance benefits pursuant to Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-431 , and for supplemental security income benefits pursuant to Title *427 XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381 -83Í. The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) found that Wack retained the ability to work as a gate guard, a position he had held before the drug overdose that resulted in his alleged disability. 1 Thus, the ALJ concluded that Wack was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act. The Appeals Council declined Wack’s request for review, and the district court affirmed. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The ALJ’s determination that Wack is capable of performing his past relevant work as a gate guard, as that work is generally performed in the national economy, is supported by substantial evidence. 3 In reaching this conclusion, the ALJ properly applied Social Security Report (SSR) 82-62, available at 1982 WL 31386 , and posed a complete hypothetical question to the vocational…