18290 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 27, 2012 / Notices 

3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b). 

4 15 U.S.C. 78q–1. In approving this proposed 

rule change, the Commission has considered the 

proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, 

and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 

5 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 

6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

rules/sro.shtml ). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for Web site viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20549 on official 

business days between the hours of 10 

a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing 

also will be available for inspection and 

copying at the principal office of CME 

and on CME’s Web site at http:// 

www.cmegroup.com/market-regulation/ 

rule-filings.html. All comments received 

will be posted without change; the 

Commission does not edit personal 

identifying information from 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. All submissions 

should refer to File Number SR–CME– 

2012–05 and should be submitted on or 

before April 17, 2012. 

IV. Commission’s Findings and Order 

Granting Accelerated Approval of 

Proposed Rule Change 

Section 19(b) of the Act 3 directs the 

Commission to approve a proposed rule 

change of a self-regulatory organization 

if it finds that such proposed rule 

change is consistent with the 

requirements of the Act and the rules 

and regulations thereunder applicable to 

such organization. The Commission 

finds that the proposed rule change is 

consistent with the requirements of the 

Act, in particular with the requirements 

of Section 17A of the Act,4 and the rules 

and regulations thereunder applicable to 

CME. Specifically, the Commission 

finds that the proposed rule change is 

consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of 

the Act which requires, among other 

things, that the rules of a clearing 

agency be designed to promote the 

prompt and accurate clearance and 

settlement of derivative agreements, 

contracts, and transactions because it 

should allow CME to enhance its 

services in clearing IRS and Interest 

Rate Futures products, thereby 

promoting the prompt and accurate 

clearance and settlement of derivative 

agreements, contracts, and 

transactions.5

In its filing, CME requested that the 

Commission approve this proposed rule 

change on an accelerated basis. CME has 

articulated three reasons for granting 

approval on an accelerated basis. One, 

the products covered by this filing and 

CME’s operations as a derivatives 

clearing organization for such products, 

are regulated by the CFTC under the 

CEA. Two, the proposed rule change 

relates solely to IRS and Interest Rate 

Futures products and therefore relate 

solely to CME’s swaps clearing activities 

and do not significantly relate to CME’s 

functions as a clearing agency for 

security-based swaps. Three, not 

approving this request on an accelerated 

basis will have a significant impact on 

the swap clearing business of CME as a 

designated clearing organization. 

The Commission finds good cause for 

granting approval of the proposed rule 

change before the thirtieth day after 

publication of the notice of its filing 

because: (i) The proposed rule change 

does not significantly affect any 

securities clearing operations of the 

clearing agency (whether in existence or 

contemplated by its rules) or any related 

rights or obligations of the clearing 

agency or persons using such service; 

(ii) the clearing agency has indicated 

that not providing accelerated approval 

would have a significant impact on its 

IRS clearing business as a designated 

clearing organization; and (iii) the 

activity relating to the non-security 

clearing operations of the clearing 

agency for which the clearing agency is 

seeking approval is subject to regulation 

by another federal regulator. 

V. Conclusion 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the 

proposed rule change (SR–CME–2012– 

05) is approved on an accelerated basis. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.6

Kevin M. O’Neill, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7279 Filed 3–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

[Docket No. SSA–2012–0018] 

Reinstate Index to Chapter III in 20 CFR 

AGENCY: Social Security Administration. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: At the request of the Office of 

the Federal Register, we are reinstating 

the finding aid ‘‘Index to Chapter III’’ in 

Title 20 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR). The finding aid 

contains a list of all Acquiescence 

Rulings published in the Federal 

Register from January 11, 1990 through 

April 1, 2012. 

DATES: The notice is effective March 27, 

2012. The Office of the Federal Register 

will include the Index in the April 2012 

edition of Title 20, chapter III of the 

CFR. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Martin Sussman, Social Security 

Administration, Office of Regulations, 

6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21235–6401, (410) 965–1767. For 

information on eligibility or filing for 

benefits, call our national toll-free 

number, 1–800–772–1213 or TTY 1– 

800–325–0778, or visit our Internet site, 

Social Security Online, at http:// 

www.socialsecurity.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

We are reinstating the ‘‘Index to 

Chapter III’’ as a finding aid in our 

chapter of Title 20 of the CFR. The 

Index lists the Acquiescence Rulings we 

published in the Federal Register from 

January 11, 1990, through April 1, 2012. 

The Index last appeared as a finding aid 

in the April 1, 2008 edition of our 

chapter of the CFR. 

You may also find a listing of 

Acquiescence Rulings on our Web site 

at http://mwww.socialsecurity.gov/ 

OP_Home/rulings/rulfind1.html. 

The Office of the Federal Register 

requested that we publish this notice, 

including the text of the Index, which 

follows. The Office of the Federal 

Register will include the Index in the 

April 2012 edition of Title 20, chapter 

III of the CFR. 

Index to Chapter III 

INDEX TO CHAPTER III—SOCIAL 

SECURITY ACQUIESCENCE RULINGS 

EDITORIAL NOTE: This listing is 

provided for information purposes only. 

It is compiled and kept up-to-date by 

the Social Security Administration. 

This listing contains all Acquiescence 

Rulings (ARs) published in the Federal 

Register under the requirements of 20 

CFR 402.35(b)(2) during the period from 

January 11, 1990, through April 1, 2012. 

The listing includes the AR number, 

title, publication date and the Federal 

Register reference number. (The 

parenthetical number that follows each 

AR number refers to the United States 

judicial circuit involved.) This notice 

also lists ARs that were rescinded 

during this period. In addition, SSA has 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 27, 2012 / Notices 18291 

included Federal Register references for 

three prior cumulative AR listing 

notices. 

SSA believes this publication will 

assist individuals in finding ARs. 

The CFR may not state the circuitwide 

standard in effect when SSA has 

determined that the holding in a 

decision of a United States Court of 

Appeals is at variance with SSA’s 

national interpretation. 

ACQUIESCENCE RULINGS 

Published cumulative lists of ARs 

relating to claims under title II and title 

XVI of the Social Security Act and part 

B of the Black Lung Benefits Act were 

issued for ARs published prior to 

January 11, 1990. 

1. The first notice announcing 14 ARs 

issued during the period from January 

23, 1986, through April 30, 1986, was 

published in the Federal Register on 

June 4, 1986 (51 FR 20354). 

2. A second notice announcing 12 

additional ARs issued during the period 

from May 20, 1986, through March 31, 

1987, was published in the Federal 

Register on August 7, 1987 (52 FR 

29911). 

3. A third notice announcing 11 more 

ARs, issued during the period from May 

1, 1987, through November 14, 1988, the 

withdrawal of one AR that was issued 

earlier, and the withdrawal of one of the 

ARs issued during this period was 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 10, 1990 (55 FR 28302). 

AR 86–2R(2) Rosenberg v. 

Richardson, 538 F.2d 487 (2d Cir. 1976); 

Capitano v. Secretary of HHS, 732 F.2d 

1066 (2d Cir. 1984)—Entitlement of a 

Deemed Widow When a Legal Widow is 

Entitled on the Same Earnings Record— 

Title II of the Social Security Act. 

Published: June 25, 1992, at 57 FR 

28527. 

NOTE: The original AR for the Second 

Circuit Court of Appeals’ holding in 

Rosenberg and Capitano (AR 86–2(2)), 

issued January 23, 1986, was rescinded 

and replaced by this revised AR. 

AR 86–19R(11) Woodson v. 

Schweiker, 656 F.2d 1169 (5th Cir. 

1981)—Interpretation of the Deemed 

Marriage Provision—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: June 25, 1992, at 57 FR 

28524. 

NOTE: The original AR applicable in 

the Eleventh Circuit for the Fifth Circuit 

Court of Appeals’ holding in Woodson 

(AR 86–19(11)), issued May 22, 1986, 

was rescinded and replaced by this 

revised AR. 

AR 90–1(9) Paxton v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 856 F.2d 

1352 (9th Cir. 1988)—Treatment of 

Dependent’s Portion of Augmented 

Veterans Benefit Paid Directly to 

Veteran—Title XVI of the Social 

Security Act. 

Published: July 16, 1990, at 55 FR 

28946. Rescinded—See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 90–2(2) Ruppert v. Bowen, 871 

F.2d 1172 (2d Cir. 1989)—Evaluation of 

a Rental Subsidy as In-Kind Income for 

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) 

Benefit Calculation Purposes—Title XVI 

of the Social Security Act. 

Published: July 16, 1990, at 55 FR 

28947. 

AR 90–3(4) Smith v. Bowen, 837 F.2d 

635 (4th Cir. 1987)—Use of Vocational 

Expert or Other Vocational Specialist in 

Determining Whether a Claimant Can 

Perform Past Relevant Work—Titles II 

and XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: July 16, 1990, at 55 FR 

28949. Rescinded—See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 90–4(4) Culbertson v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 859 F.2d 

319 (4th Cir. 1988), Young v. Bowen, 

858 F.2d 951 (4th Cir. 1988)—Waiver of 

Administrative Finality in Proceedings 

Involving Unrepresented Claimants 

Who Lack the Mental Competence to 

Request. Administrative Review—Titles 

II and XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: July 16, 1990, at 55 FR 

28943. 

AR 90–5(2) Kier v. Sullivan, 888 F.2d 

244 (2d Cir. 1989), reh’g denied, January 

22, 1990—Assessment of Residual 

Functiona1 Capacity in Disabled 

Widows’ Cases—Title II of the Social 

Security Act. 

Published: September 18, 1990, at 55 

FR 38400. Rescinded—See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 90–6(1) Cassus v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 893 F.2d 

454 (lst Cir. 1990), reh’g denied, April 

9, 1990—Assessment of Residual 

Functional Capacity in Disabled 

Widows’ Cases—Title II of the Social 

Security Act. 

Published: September 18, 1990, at 55 

FR 38398. Rescinded—See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 90–7(9) Ruff v. Sullivan, 907 F.2d 

915 (9th Cir. 1990)—Assessment of 

Residual Functional Capacity in 

Disabled Widows’ Cases—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: September 18, 1990, at 55 

FR 38402. Rescinded—See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 91–1(5) Lidy v. Sullivan, 911 F.2d 

1075 (5th Cir. 1990)—Right to Subpoena 

an examining Physician for Crossexamination Purposes—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: December 31, 1991, at 56 

FR 67625 as AR 91–X(5). 

Correction Notice Published: May 1, 

1992, at 57 FR 18899—AR number 

changed to 91–1(5). 

AR 92–1(3) Mazza v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 903 F.2d 

953 (3d Cir. 1990)—Order of 

Effectuation in Concurrent Application 

Cases (Title II/Title XVI). 

Published: January 10, 1992, at 57 FR 

1190 as AR 91–X(3). 

Correction Notice Published: May 1, 

1992, at 57 FR 18899—AR number 

changed to 92–1(3). 

AR 92–2(6) Difford v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 910 F.2d 

1316 (6th Cir. 1990), reh ’g denied, 

February 7, 1991—Scope of Review on 

Appeal in a Medical Cessation of 

Disability Case—Title II of the Social 

Security Act. 

Published: March 17, 1992, at 57 FR 

9262. 

AR 92–3(4) Branham v. Heckler, 775 

F.2d 1271 (4th Cir. 1985); Flowers v. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, 904 F.2d 211 (4th Cir. 1990)— 

What Constitutes a Significant-WorkRelated Limitation of Function. 

Published: March 10, 1992, at 57 FR 

8463. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 92–4(11) Bloodsworth v. Heckler, 

703 F.2d 1233 (11th Cir. 1983)—Judicial 

Review of an Appeals Council Dismissal 

of a Request for Review of an 

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) 

Decision. 

Published: April 8, 1992, at 57 FR 

11961. 

AR 92–5(9) Quinlivan v. Sullivan, 916 

F.2d 524 (9th Cir. 1990)—Meaning of 

the Term ‘‘Against Equity and Good 

Conscience’’ in the Rules for Waiver of 

Recovery of an Overpayment—Titles II 

and XVI of the Social Security Act; Title 

IV of the Federal Mine Safety and 

Health Act of 1977. 

Published: June 22, 1992, at 57 FR 

27783. 

AR 92–6(10) Walker v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 943 F.2d 

1257 (l0th Cir. 1991)—Entitlement to 

Trial Work Period Before Approval of an 

Award for Benefits and Before Twelve 

Months Have Elapsed Since Onset of 

Disability—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: September 17, 1992, at 57 

FR 43007. 

AR 92–7(9) Gonzales v. Sullivan, 914 

F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1990)—Effect of 

Initial Determination Notice Language 

on the Application of Administrative 

Finality-Titles II and XVI of the Social 

Security Act. 

Published: September 30. 1992, at 57 

FR 45061. 

AR 93–1(4) Branham v. Heckler, 775 

F.2d 1271 (4th Cir. 1985); Flowers v. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

18292 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 27, 2012 / Notices 

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, 904 F.2d 211 (4th Cir. 1990)— 

What Constitutes an Additional and 

Significant Work-Related Limitation of 

Function—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: April 29, 1993, at 58 FR 

25996. 

NOTE: The original AR for the Fourth 

Circuit Court of Appeals’ holding in 

Branham and Flowers (AR 92–31(4)), 

issued March 10, 1992, was revised to 

reflect a regulatory change regarding the 

IQ Listing range. There were no other 

substantive changes to this AR. 

Rescinded-See section on Rescissions in 

this notice. 

AR 93–2(2) Conley v. Bowen, 859 F.2d 

261 (2d Cir. 1988)—Determination of 

Whether an Individual with a Disabling 

Impairment Has Engaged in Substantial 

Gainful Activity Following a 

Reentitlement Period—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: May 17, 1993, at 58 FR 

28887. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 93–3(6) Akers v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 966 F.2d 

205 (6th Cir. 1992)—Attorney’s Fees 

Based in Part on Continued Benefits 

Paid to Social Security Claimants—Title 

II of the Social Security Act. 

Published: July 29, 1993, at 58 FR 

40662. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 93–4(2) Condon and Brodner v. 

Bowen, 853 F.2d 66 (2d Cir. 1988)— 

Attorney’s Fees Based in Part on 

Continued Benefits Paid to Social 

Security Claimants—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: July 29, 1993, at 58 FR 

40663. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 93–5(11) Shoemaker v. Bowen, 

853 F.2d 858 (11th Cir. 1988)— 

Attorney’s Fees Based in Part on 

Continued Benefits Paid to Social 

Security Claimants—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: July 29, 1993, at 58 FR 

40665. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 93–6(8) Brewster on Behalf of 

Keller v. Sullivan, 972 F.2d 898 (8th Cir. 

1992)—Interpretation of the Secretary’s 

Regulation Regarding Presumption of 

Death—Title II of the Social Security 

Act 

Published: August 16, 1993, at 58 FR 

43369. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 94–1(10) Wolfe v. Sullivan, 988 

F.2d 1025 (10th Cir. 1993)— 

Contributions to Support re: 

Posthumous Illegitimate Child—Title II 

of the Social Security Act. 

Published: June 27, 1994, at 59 FR 

33003. 

AR 94–2(4) Lively v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 820 F.2d 

1391 (4th Cir. 1987)—Effect of Prior 

Disability Findings on Adjudication of a 

Subsequent Disability Claim Arising 

Under the Same Title of the Social 

Security Act—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: July 7, 1994, at 59 FR 

34849. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 95–1(6) Preslar v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 14 F.3d 

1107 (6th Cir. 1994)— Definition of 

Highly Marketable Skills for Individuals 

Close to Retirement Age—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: May 4, 1995, at 60 FR 

22091. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 95–2(9) Hodge v. Shalala. 27 F.3d 

430 (9th Cir. 1994)—Workers’ 

Compensation—Proration of a LumpSum Award for Permanent Disability 

Over the Remainder of an Individual’s 

Working Life Under Oregon Workers’ 

Compensation Law—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: July 12, 1995, at 60 FR 

35987. 

AR 96–1(6) DeSonier v. Sullivan, 906 

F.2d 228 (6th Cir. 1990)—Method of 

Application of State Intestate 

Succession Law in Determining 

Entitlement to Child’s Benefits—Title II 

of the Social Security Act. 

Published: June 3, 1996, at 61 FR 

27942. 

AR 97–1(1) Parisi By Cooney v. 

Chater, 69 F.3d 614 (1st Cir. 1995)— 

Reduction of Benefits Under the Family 

Maximum in Cases Involving Dual 

Entitlement—Title II of the Social 

Security Act. 

Published: January 13, 1997, at 62 FR 

1792. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 97–2(9) Gamble v. Chater, 68 F.3d 

319 (9th Cir. 1995)—Amputation of a 

Lower Extremity—When the Inability to 

Afford the Cost of a Prosthesis Meets the 

Requirements of Section 1.10C of the 

Listing of Impairments—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: January 13, 1997, at 62 FR 

1791. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 97–3(11) Daniels on Behalf of 

Daniels v. Sullivan, 979 F.2d 1516 (11th 

Cir. 1992)—Application of a State’s 

Intestacy Law Requirement that 

Paternity be Established During the 

Lifetime of the Father—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: August 4, 1997, at 62 FR 

41989. 

AR 97–4(9) Chavez v. Bowen, 844 

F.2d 691 (9th Cir. 1988)—Effect of a 

Prior Final Decision That a Claimant is 

Not Disabled, And of Findings 

Contained Therein, On Adjudication of 

a Subsequent Disability Claim Arising 

Under the Same Title of the Social 

Security Act—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: December 3, 1997, at 62 FR 

64038. 

AR 98–1(8) Newton v. Chater, 92 F.3d 

688 (8th Cir. 1996)—Entitlement to Trial 

Work Period Before Approval of an 

Award for Benefits and Before Twelve 

Months Have Elapsed Since Onset of 

Disability—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: February 23, 1998, at 63 

FR 9037. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 98–2(8) Sird v. Chater, 105 F.3d 

401 (8th Cir. 1997)—Mental 

Retardation—What Constitutes an 

Additional and Significant WorkRelated Limitation of Function—Titles 

II and XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: February 24, 1998, at 63 

FR 9279. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 98–3(6) Dennard v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 907 F.2d 

598 (6th Cir. 1990)—Effect of a Prior 

Finding of the Demands of Past Work on 

Adjudication of a Subsequent Disability 

Claim Arising Under the Same Title of 

the Social Security Act—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: June 1, 1998. at 63 FR 

29770. 

AR 98–4(6) Drummond v. 

Commissioner of Social Security, 126 

F.3d 1337 (6th Cir. 1997)—Effect of 

Prior Findings on Adjudication of a 

Subsequent Disability Claim Arising 

Under the Same Title of the Social 

Security Act—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: June 1, 1998, at 63 FR 

29771. 

AR 98–5(8) State of Minnesota v. 

Apfel, 151 F.3d 742 (8th Cir. 1998)— 

Coverage for Employees Under a 

Federal-State Section 218 Agreement or 

Modification and Application of the 

Student Services Exclusion From 

Coverage to Services Performed by 

Medical Residents—Title II of the Social 

Security Act. 

Published: October 30, 1998, at 63 FR 

58444. 

AR 99–1(2) Florez on Behalf of 

Wallace v. Callahan, 156 F.3d 438 (2d 

Cir. 1998)— Supplemental Security 

Income—Deeming of Income From a 

Stepparent to a Child When the Natural 

Parent is Not Living In the Same 

Household—Title XVI of the Social 

Security Act. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 27, 2012 / Notices 18293 

Published: February 1, 1999, at 64 FR 

4923. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 99–2(8) Kerns v. Apfel, 160 F.3d 

464 (8th Cir. 1998)—Definition of 

Highly Marketable Skills for Individuals 

Close to Retirement Age—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: March 11, 1999, at 64 FR 

12205. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 99–3(5) McQueen v. Apfel, 168 

F.3d 152 (5th Cir. 1999)— Definition of 

Highly Marketable Skills for Individuals 

Close to Retirement Age—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: May 27, 1999, at 64 FR 

28853. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 99–4(11) Bloodsworth v. Heckler, 

703 F.2d 1233 (11th Cir. 1983)—Judicial 

Review of an Appeals Council Dismissal 

of a Request for Review of an 

Administrative Law Judge Decision— 

Titles II and XVI of the Social Security 

Act. 

Published: October 26, 1999, at 64 FR 

57687. 

NOTE: The original AR for the 

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ 

holding in Bloodsworth (AR 92–4(11)), 

issued April 8, 1992, was revised to 

delete a parenthetical statement and to 

update the AR’s language. These 

revisions were technical corrections 

only and did not involve any 

substantive changes. 

AR 00–1(4) Albright v. Commissioner 

of the Social Security Administration, 

174 F.3d 473 (4th Cir. 1999)—Effect of 

Prior Disability Findings on 

Adjudication of a Subsequent Disability 

Claim—Titles II and XVI of the Social 

Security Act. 

Published: January 12, 2000, at 65 FR 

1936. 

AR 00–2(7) Hickman v. Apfel. 187 

F.3d 683 (7th Cir. 1999)—Evidentiary 

Requirements for Determining Medical 

Equivalence to a Listed Impairment— 

Titles II and XVI of the Social Security 

Act. 

Published: May 3, 2000, at 65 FR 

25783. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 00–3(10) Haddock v. Apfel, 196 

F.3d 1084 (l0th Cir. 1999)—Use of 

Vocational Expert Testimony and the 

Dictionary of Occupational Titles Under 

20 CFR 404.1566, 416.966—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: June 20, 2000, at 65 FR 

38312. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 00–4(2) Curry v. Apfel, 209 F.3d 

117 (2d Cir. 2000)—Burden of Proving 

Residual Functional Capacity at Step 

Five of the Sequential Evaluation 

Process for Determining Disability— 

Titles II and XVI of the Social Security 

Act. 

Published: September 11, 2000, at 65 

FR 54879. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 00–5(6) Salamalekis v. Apfel, 221 

F.3d 828 (6th Cir. 2000)—Entitlement to 

Trial Work Period Before Approval of an 

Award of Benefits and Before 12 Months 

Have Elapsed Since the Alleged Onset 

of Disability—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Published: November 15, 2000, at 65 

FR 69116. Rescinded-See section on 

Rescissions in this notice. 

AR 01–1(3) Sykes v. Apfel, 228 F.3d 

259 (3d Cir. 2000)—Using the Grid 

Rules as a Framework for 

Decisionmaking When an Individual’s 

Occupational Base is Eroded by a 

Nonexertional Limitation—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: January 25, 2001, at 66 FR 

7829. 

AR 03–1(7) Blakes v. Barnhart, 331 

F.3d 565 (7th Cir. 2003)—Cases 

Involving Sections 12.05 and 112.05 of 

the Listing of Impairments That Are 

Remanded By a Court for Further 

Proceedings Under Titles II and XVI of 

the Social Security Act. 

Published: December 23, 2003, at 613 

FR 74279. 

AR 04–1(9) Howard on behalf of Wolff 

v. Barnhart, 341 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 

2003)—Applicability of the Statutory 

Requirement for Pediatrician Review in 

Childhood Disability Cases to the 

Hearings and Appeals Levels of the 

Administrative Review Process Under 

Title XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Published: April 26, 2004, at 69 FR 

22578. 

AR 05–1(9) Gillett-Netting v. 

Barnhart, 371 F.3d 593 (9th Cir. 2004), 

reh’g denied, December 14, 2004 

—Applicability of State Law and the 

Social Security Act in Determining 

Whether a Child Conceived by Artificial 

Means after an Insured Person’s Death is 

Eligible for Child’s Insurance Benefits— 

Title II of the Social Security Act. 

Published: September 22, 2005, at 70 

FR 55656. 

AR 06–1(2) Fowlkes v. Adamec, 432 

F.3d 90 (2d Cir. 2005)—Determining 

Whether an Individual is a Fugitive 

Felon Under the Social Security Act 

(Act)—Titles II and XVI of the Act. 

Published: April 6, 2000, at 71 FR 

17551. 

RESCISSIONS WITHOUT 

REPLACEMENT ARs 

AR 86–1(9) Summy v. Schweiker, 688 

F.2d 1233 (9th Cir. 1982)—Third party 

payments for medical care or services— 

Title XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 5, 

1994, at 59 FR 34444. 

AR 86–6(3) Aubrey v. Richardson, 462 

F.2d 782 (3d Cir. 1972); Shelnutt v. 

Heckler, 723 F.2d 1131 (3d Cir. 1983)— 

Interpretation of the Secretary’s 

Regulation Regarding Presumption of 

Death—Title II of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 

14, 1995, at 60 FR 36327. 

AR 86–7(5) Autrey v. Harris, 639 F.2d 

1233 (5th Cir. 1981); Wages v. 

Schweiker, 659 F.2d 59 (5th Cir. 1981)— 

Interpretation of the Secretary’s 

Regulation Regarding Presumption of 

Death—Title II of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 

14, 1995, at 60 FR 36327. 

AR 86–8(6) Johnson v. Califano, 607 

F.2d 1178 (6th Cir. 1979)— 

Interpretation of the Secretary’s 

Regulation Regarding Presumption of 

Death—Title II of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 

14, 1995, at 60 FR 36327. 

AR 86–9(9) Secretary of Health, 

Education and Welfare v. Meza, 386 

F.2d 389 (9th Cir. 1966); Gardner v. 

Wilcox, 370 F.2d 492 (9th Cir. 1966)— 

Interpretation of the Secretary’s 

Regulation Regarding Presumption of 

Death—Title II of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 

14, 1995, at 60 FR 36327. 

AR 86–10(10) Edwards v. Califano, 

619 F.2d 865 (10th Cir. 1980)— 

Interpretation of the Secretary’s 

Regulation Regarding Presumption of 

Death—Title II of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 

14, 1995, at 60 FR 36327. 

AR 86–11(11) Autrey v. Harris, 639 

F.2d 1233 (5th Cir. 1981)— 

Interpretation of the Secretary’s 

Regulation Regarding Presumption of 

Death—Title II of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 

14, 1995, at 60 FR 36327. 

AR 86–17(9) Owens v. Schweiker, 692 

F.2d 80 (9th Cir. 1982)—Child’s 

Benefits—Title II of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

October 28, 1998, at 63 FR 57727. 

AR 87–1(6) Webb v. Richardson, 472 

F.2d 529 (6th Cir. 1972)—Attorneys’ 

Fees—Single Fee, Not to Exceed 25 

Percent of Past-Due Benefits, Set by 

Tribunal Which Ultimately Upholds the 

Claim—Title II of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: March 

3, 1995, at 60 FR 11977. 

AR 87–2(11) Butterworth v. Bowen, 

796 F.2d 1379 (11th Cir. 1986)—The 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

18294 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 27, 2012 / Notices 

Conditions under Which the Appeals 

Council has the Right to Reopen and 

Revise Prior Decisions—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 7, 

1998, at 63 FR 36726. 

AR 87–3(9) Hart v. Bowen, 799 F.2d 

567 (9th Cir. 1986)—Current Market 

Value of an Installment Sales Contract 

as an Excess Resource. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

February 9, 1995, at 60 FR 7782. 

AR 87–4(8) Iamarino v. Heckler, 795 

F.2d 59 (8th Cir. 1986)—Positive 

Presumption of Substantial Gainful 

Activity (SGA) for Sheltered Work. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 

11, 2000, at 65 FR 42793. 

AR 87–5(3) Velazquez v. Heckler, 802 

F.2d 680 (3d Cir. 1986)—Consideration 

of Vocational Factors in Past Work 

Determination. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 

16, 1990, at 55 FR 28943. 

AR 88–1(11) Patterson v. Bowen, 799 

F.2d 1455 (11th Cir. 1986), reh’g denied, 

February 12, 1987—Use of the Age 

Factor in the Medical-Vocational 

Guidelines in Making Disability 

Decisions. 

Notice of Rescission Published: April 

6, 2000, at 65 FR 18143. 

AR 88–3(7) McDonald v. Bowen, 800 

F.2d 153 (7th Cir. 1986), amended on 

reh’g, 818 F.2d 559 (7th Cir. 1987)— 

Entitlement to Benefits Where a Person 

Returns to Work Less Than 12 Months 

After Onset of Disability. 

Notice of Rescission Published: June 

10, 2002, at 67 FR 39781. 

AR 88–5(1) McCuin v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 817 F.2d 

161 (1st Cir. 1987)—Reopening by the 

Appeals Council of Decisions of 

Administrative Law Judges under Titles 

II and XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

February 23, 1994, at 59 FR 8650. 

AR 88–7(5) Hickman v. Bowen, 803 

F.2d 1377 (5th Cir. 1986)—Evaluation of 

Loans of In-Kind Support and 

Maintenance for Supplemental Security 

Income Benefit Calculation Purposes. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

September 8, 1992, at 57 FR 40918. 

AR 90–1(9) Paxton v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 856 F .2d 

1352 (9th Cir.1988)—Treatment of 

Dependent’s Portion of Augmented 

Veterans Benefit Paid Directly to 

Veteran—Title XVI of the Social 

Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

November 17, 1994, at 59 FR 59416. 

AR 90–3(4) Smith v. Bowen, 837 F.2d 

635 (4th Cir. 1987)—Use of Vocational 

Expert or Other Vocational Specialist in 

Determining Whether a Claimant Can 

Perform Past Relevant Work—Titles II 

and XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

August 26, 2003, at 68 FR 51317. 

AR 90–5(2) Kier v. Sullivan, 888 F.2d 

244 (2d Cir. 1989), reh’g denied, January 

22, 1990—Assessment of Residual 

Functional Capacity in Disabled 

Widows’ Cases—Title II of the Social 

Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: May 

22, 1991, at 56 FR 23592. 

AR 90–6(1) Cassas v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 393 F.2d 

454 (1st Cir. 1990), reh’g denied, April 

9, 1990—Assessment of Residual 

Functional Capacity in Disabled 

Widows’ Cases—Title II of the Social 

Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: May 

22, 1991, at 56 FR 23591. 

AR 90–7(9) Ruff v. Sullivan, 907 F.2d 

915 (9th Cir. 1990)—Assessment of 

Residual Functional Capacity in 

Disabled Widows’ Cases—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: May 

22, 1991, at 56 FR 23592. 

AR 92–3(4) Branham v. Heckler, 775 

F.2d 1271 (4th Cir. 1985); Flowers v. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, 904 F.2d 211 (4th Cir. 1990)— 

What Constitutes a Significant WorkRelated Limitation of Function. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

August 21, 2000, at 65 FR 50784. 

AR 92–6(10) Walker v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 943 F.2d 

1257 (10th Cir. 1991)—Entitlement to 

Trial Work Period Before Approval of an 

Award for Benefits and Before Twelve 

Months Have Elapsed Since Onset of 

Disability-Titles II and XVI of the Social 

Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: June 

10, 2002, at 67 FR 39871. 

AR 93–1(4) Branham v. Heckler, 775 

F.2d 1271 (4th Cir. 1985); Flowers v. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, 904 F.2d 211 (4th Cir. 1990)— 

What Constitutes an Additional and 

Significant Work-Related Limitation of 

Function—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

August 21, 2000, at 65 FR 50784. 

AR. 93–2(2) Conley v. Bowen, 859 

F.2d 261 (3d Cir. 1988)—Determination 

of Whether an Individual With a 

Disabling Impairment Has Engaged in 

Substantial Gainful Activity Following a 

Reentitlement Period—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

August 10, 2000, at 65 FR 42793. 

AR 93–3(6) Akers v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 966 F.2d 

205 (6th Cir. 1992)—Attorney’s Fees 

Based in Part on Continued Benefits 

Paid to Social Security Claimants—Title 

II of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: April 

14, 2000, at 65 FR 20239. 

AR 93–4(2) Condon and Brodner v. 

Bowen, 853 F.2d 66 (2d Cir. 1988)— 

Attorney’s Fees Based in Part on 

Continued Benefits Paid to Social 

Security Claimants—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: April 

14, 2000, at 65 FR 20239. 

AR 93–5(11) Shoemaker v. Bowen, 

853 F.2d 858 (11th Cir. 1988)— 

Attorney’s Fees Based in Part on 

Continued Benefits Paid to Social 

Security Claimants—Title II of the 

Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: April 

14, 2000, at 65 FR 20239. 

AR 93–6(8) Brewster on Behalf of 

Keller v. Sullivan, 972 F.2d 898 (8th Cir. 

1992)—Interpretation of the Secretary’s 

Regulation Regarding Presumption of 

Death—Title II of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: July 

14, 1995, at 60 FR 36327. 

AR 94–2(4) Lively v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 820 F.2d 

1391 (4th Cir. 1987)—Effect of Prior 

Disability Findings on Adjudication of a 

Subsequent Disability Claim Arising 

Under the Same Title of the Social 

Security Act—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

January 12, 2000, at 65 FR 1936. 

AR 95–1(6) Preslar v. Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, 14 F.3d 

1107 (6th Cir. 1994)—Definition of 

Highly Marketable Skills for Individuals 

Close to Retirement Age—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: April 

6, 2000, at 65 FR 18144. 

AR 97–1(1) Parisi By Cooney v. 

Chater, 69 F.3d 814 (1st Cir. 1995)— 

Reduction of Benefits Under the Family 

Maximum In Cases Involving Dual 

Entitlement—Title II of the Social 

Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

October 27, 1999, at 64 FR 57919. 

AR 97–2(9) Gamble v. Chater, 68 F.3d 

319 (9th Cir. 1995)—Amputation of a 

Lower Extremity—When the Inability to 

Afford the Cost of a Prosthesis Meets the 

Requirements of Section 1.10C of the 

Listing of Impairments—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

November 19, 2001, at 66 FR 58047. 

AR 98–1(8) Newton v. Chater, 92 F.3d 

688 (8th Cir. 1996)—Entitlement to Trial 

Work Period Before Approval of an 

Award for Benefits and Before Twelve 

Months Have Elapsed Since Onset of 

Disability—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: June 

10, 2002, at 67 FR 39781. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 27, 2012 / Notices 18295 

AR 98–2(8) Sird v. Chater, 105 F.3d 

401 (8th Cir. 1997)—Mental 

Retardation—What Constitutes an 

Additional and Significant WorkRelated Limitation of Function—Titles 

II and XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

August 21, 2000, at 65 FR 50784. 

AR 99–1(2) Florez on Behalf of 

Wallace v. Callahan, 156 F.3d 438 (2d 

Cir. 1998)— Supplemental Security 

Income—Deeming of Income From a 

Stepparent to a Child When the Natural 

Parent is Not Living in the Same 

Household—Title XVI of the Social 

Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: May 

15, 2008, at 73 FR 28181. 

AR 99–2(8) Kerns v. Apfel, 160 F.3d 

164 (8th Cir. 1998)—Definition of 

Highly Marketable Skills for Individuals 

Close to Retirement Age—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: April 

6, 2000, at 65 FR 18144. 

AR 99–3(5) McQueen v. Apfel, 168 

F.3d 152 (5th Cir, 1999)—Definition of 

Highly Marketable Skills for Individuals 

Close to Retirement Age—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: April 

6, 2000, at 65 FR 18144. 

AR 00–2(7) Hickman v. Apfel, 187 

F.3d 683 (7th Cir. 1999)—Evidentiary 

Requirements for Determining Medical 

Equivalence to a Listed Impairment— 

Titles II and XVI of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: March 

1, 2006, at 71 FR 10584. 

AR 00–3(10) Haddock v. Apfel, 196 

F.3d 1084 (10th Cir, 1999)—Use of 

Vocational Expert Testimony and the 

Dictionary of Occupational Titles Under 

20 CFR 404.1566, 416.966—Titles II and 

XVI of the Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

December 4, 2000, at 65 FR 75758. 

AR 00–4(2) Curry v. Apfel, 209 F.3d 

117 (2d Cir. 2000)—Burden of Proving 

Residual Functional Capacity at Step 

Five of the Sequential Evaluation 

Process for Determining Disability— 

Titles II and XVI of the Social Security 

Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: 

August 26, 2003, at 68 FR 51317. 

AR 00–5(6) Salamalekis v. Apfel, 221 

F.3d 828 (6th Cir. 2000)—Entitlement to 

Trial Work Period Before Approval of an 

Award of Benefits and Before 12 Months 

Have Elapsed Since the Alleged Onset 

of Disability—Titles II and XVI of the 

Social Security Act. 

Notice of Rescission Published: June 

10, 2002, at 67 FR 39781. 

Dated: March 20, 2012. 

LaTina Burse Greene, 

Assistant Deputy Commissioner for 

Retirement and Disability Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7182 Filed 3–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 7812] 

Culturally Significant Objects Imported 

for Exhibition Determinations: ‘‘Decree 

Stele’’ 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the 

following determinations: Pursuant to 

the authority vested in me by the Act of 

October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 

2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 

27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and 

Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 

2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et 

seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of 

October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority 

No. 236–3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as 

appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 

257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby 

determine that the object to be included 

in the exhibition ‘‘Decree Stele’’ 

imported from abroad for temporary 

exhibition within the United States, is 

of cultural significance. The object is 

imported pursuant to a loan agreement 

with the foreign owner or custodian. I 

also determine that the exhibition or 

display of the exhibit object at the Getty 

Villa, Pacific Palisades, CA, from on or 

about April 25, 2012, until on or about 

March 30, 2015, and at possible 

additional exhibitions or venues yet to 

be determined, is in the national 

interest. I have ordered that Public 

Notice of these Determinations be 

published in the Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information, including the art 

object list, contact Julie Simpson, 

Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal 

Adviser, U.S. Department of State 

(telephone: 202–632–6467). The mailing 

address is U.S. Department of State, SA– 

5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), 

Washington, DC 20522–0505. 

Dated: March 20, 2012. 

J. Adam Ereli, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau 

of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 

Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7348 Filed 3–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 7833] 

Culturally Significant Objects Imported 

for Exhibition 

Determinations: ‘‘Roy Lichtenstein: A 

Retrospective’’ 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the 

following determinations: Pursuant to 

the authority vested in me by the Act of 

October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 

2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 

27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and 

Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 

2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et 

seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of 

October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority 

No. 236–3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as 

appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 

257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby 

determine that the objects to be 

included in the exhibition ‘‘Roy 

Lichtenstein: A Retrospective’’ imported 

from abroad for temporary exhibition 

within the United States, are of cultural 

significance. The objects are imported 

pursuant to loan agreements with the 

foreign owners or custodians. I also 

determine that the exhibition or display 

of the exhibit objects at The Art Institute 

of Chicago, Chicago, IL, from on or 

about May 16, 2012, until on or about 

September 3, 2012; The National Gallery 

of Art, Washington, DC, from on or 

about October 14, 2012, until on or 

about January 6, 2013, and at possible 

additional exhibitions or venues yet to 

be determined, is in the national 

interest. I have ordered that Public 

Notice of these Determinations be 

published in the Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information, including a list of 

the exhibit objects, contact Julie 

Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, Office of 

the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of 

State (telephone: 202–632–6467). The 

mailing address is U.S. Department of 

State, SA–5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 

5H03), Washington, DC 20522–0505. 

Dated: March 20, 2012. 

J. Adam Ereli, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau 

of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 

Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7349 Filed 3–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice: 7812] 

Industry Advisory Panel: Notice of 

Open Meeting 

The Industry Advisory Panel of the 

Bureau of Overseas Buildings 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES