### 29475 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Notices

following nonexertional limitations generally do significantly erode an occupational base: Loss of bilateral manual dexterity (sedentary jobs); constriction of visual field (light and medium jobs); no stooping, and poor balance when standing or walking on uneven terrain. See SSR 96–9p: Policy Interpretation Ruling Titles II and XVI: Determining Capability To Do Other Work—Implications of a Residual Functional Capacity for Less Than a Full Range of Sedentary Work, at *5–6. SSR 83–14: Titles II and XVI: Capability To Do Other Work— The Medical-Vocational Rules as a Framework for Evaluating a Combination of Exertional and Nonexertional Impairments. SSR 83–10: Titles II and XVI: Determining Capability to do Other Work—The Medical-Vocational Rules of Appendix 2 and SSR 83–12: Titles II and XVI: Capability to do Other Work—The Medical-Vocational Rules as a Framework For Evaluating Exertional Limitations Within a Range of Work or Between Ranges of Work also provide helpful adjudicative guidance on using the rules and the impact of nonexertional impairments on the exertional occupational base. occupational base is not significantly eroded by non-exertional limitations, the adjudicator may use the Grid rules as a framework, and VE testimony is not required.

In Brock, the ALJ found that Brock retained the ability to perform unskilled work. Pursuant to SSR 85–15, the ALJ found Brock’s non-exertional limitations had little or no effect on the occupational base of medium exertional level unskilled work before applying the framework of Grid rule 203.25 to find Brock was not disabled.

The Brock Court’s decision differs from our policy because it held that, because the ALJ found Brock had severe mental impairments, ‘‘the ALJ should have consulted a [VE] in determining whether Brock had the RFC to perform other jobs that exist in significant number in the national economy.’’ The holding requires the ALJ to consult a VE before denying a claim at step five of our sequential evaluation process when the claim involves an individual with a severe mental impairment(s), regardless of whether adjudicative guidance available in an SSR holds that the resulting nonexertional limitation(s) does not significantly erode the occupational base and application of the applicable Grid rule is appropriate.
Explanation of How We Will Apply the Brock Decision Within the Circuit

This Ruling applies only to claims in which the claimant resides in Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota at the time of the determinations or decision at the initial, reconsideration, and ALJ hearing levels.

In making a disability determination or decision at step five of the sequential evaluation process (or the last step in the sequential evaluation process in continuing disability review claims), we will not rely exclusively on the Grid rules as a framework for decision making when an individual has a severe mental impairment(s). Before we deny a claim for disability benefits at step five (or the last step in the sequential evaluation process in continuing disability review claims) when a claimant has a severe mental impairment(s), we will produce VE evidence in claims at the hearing level. For claims decided at the initial and reconsideration levels, we will use evidence from a VS, the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT), or another reliable source of job information, such as the ones listed in 20 CFR 404.1566(d) and 416.966(d).

At the Appeals Council level, the Appeals Council will use this AR to determine whether it was correctly applied at the hearing level. However, when the Appeals Council exercises its authority to issue a corrective unfavorable decision, the Appeals Council may rely on vocational evidence adduced at the hearing.

[FR Doc. 2014–11841 Filed 5–21–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4191–02–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF STATE**

**[PUBLIC NOTICE: 8743]**

**Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: ‘‘The**  **Holocaust’’ Exhibition**

**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 ‘‘The Holocaust,’’ imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Washington, DC, from on or about June 12, 2014, until on or about June 11, 2017, 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: May 15, 2014. Kelly Keiderling, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2014–11907 Filed 5–21–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4710–05–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF STATE**

**[Public Notice 8741]**

**Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: ‘‘Taras**  **Shevchenko: Poet, Artist, Icon’’**

**AGENCY :**  Department of State.

**ACTION :**  Notice, correction.

**SUMMARY :**  On March 4, 2014, notice was published on page 12261 of the Federal Register (volume 79, number 42) of determinations made by the Department of State pertaining to the exhibition ‘‘Taras Shevchenko: Poet, Artist, Icon.’’ The referenced notice is corrected here to include additional objects as part of the exhibition. 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 additional objects to be included in the exhibition ‘‘Taras Shevchenko: Poet, Artist, Icon,’’ imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The additional objects are imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the additional objects at the Ukrainian Museum, New York, New York, from on or about June 6, 2014, until on or about November 14, 2014, 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

.