Notice of Stakeholder Consultations on Responsible Conflict Mineral Sourcing, 15265-15266 [2017-05972]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 57 / Monday, March 27, 2017 / Notices
determines whether an individual’s
impairment(s) meets or medically
equals a listing. The AC may ask its
medical support staff to help decide
whether an individual’s impairment(s)
medically equals a listing.
POLICY INTERPRETATION
Evidentiary requirements
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
At the hearings level or at the AC
level when the AC issues its own
decision, the adjudicator is responsible
for the finding of medical equivalence.
The adjudicator must base his or her
decision about whether the individual’s
impairment(s) medically equals a listing
on the preponderance of the evidence in
the record. To demonstrate the required
support of a finding that an individual
is disabled based on medical
equivalence at step 3, the record must
contain one of the following:
1. A prior administrative medical
finding from an MC or PC from the
initial or reconsideration adjudication
levels supporting the medical
equivalence finding, or
2. ME evidence, which may include
testimony or written responses to
interrogatories, obtained at the hearings
level supporting the medical
equivalence finding, or
3. A report from the AC’s medical
support staff supporting the medical
equivalence finding.
When an MC or PC makes
administrative medical findings at the
initial or reconsideration levels, the
findings are part of the Commissioner’s
determination; therefore, they are not
evidence at that level of adjudication.11
At subsequent levels of the
administrative review process, the MCs’
or PCs’ administrative medical findings
made at the initial or reconsideration
levels are prior administrative medical
findings, which are evidence.12
Although adjudicators at the hearings
and AC levels are not required to adopt
prior administrative medical findings
when issuing decisions, adjudicators
must consider them and articulate how
they considered them in the decision.13
Council may also make a decision after a Federal
court remands a case. See 20 CFR 404.983 and
416.1483.
11 See 20 CFR 404.1513a(a)(1) and 416.913a(a)(1).
12 See 20 CFR 404.1513a(b)–(c) and 416.913a(b)–
(c). It is possible for an MC or PC to have found
that an individual’s impairment(s) medically
equal(s) the requirements of a listed impairment(s),
but we would still not make a favorable
determination. For example, we could find that the
individual does not meet nonmedical requirements
for eligibility.
13 See 20 CFR 404.1513a(b)–(c), 404.1520c,
416.913a(b)–(c), and 416.920c. In States using the
two testing modifications discussed in footnote 7,
the record may not contain any MC or PC prior
administrative medical finding about medical
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:02 Mar 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
When an adjudicator at the hearings
level obtains ME testimony or written
responses to interrogatories about
whether an individual’s impairment(s)
medically equals a listing, the
adjudicator cannot rely on an ME’s
conclusory statement that an
individual’s impairment(s) medically
equals a listed impairment(s). Whether
an impairment(s) medically equals the
requirements of a listed impairment is
an issue reserved to the Commissioner.
If the ME states that the individual’s
impairment(s) medically equals a listed
impairment, the adjudicator must ask
the ME to identify medical evidence in
the record that supports the ME’s
statements. Adjudicators will consider
ME testimony and interrogatories using
our rules for considering evidence. The
adjudicator will then consider whether
an individual’s impairment(s) medically
equals a listing using one of the three
methods specified in 20 CFR 404.1526
and 416.926.
Similarly, when the AC obtains a
report from its medical support staff to
evaluate medical equivalence, the AC
retains final responsibility for
determining whether an individual’s
impairment(s) medically equals a listed
impairment. The AC will consider the
medical support staff’s report and all
other supporting medical evidence
using our rules for considering
evidence. The AC will then consider
whether an individual’s impairment(s)
medically equals a listing using one of
the three methods specified in 20 CFR
404.1526 and 416.926.
If an adjudicator at the hearings or AC
level believes that the evidence does not
reasonably support a finding that the
individual’s impairment(s) medically
equals a listed impairment, we do not
require the adjudicator to obtain ME
evidence or medical support staff input
prior to making a step 3 finding that the
individual’s impairment(s) does not
medically equal a listed impairment.
15265
three methods specified in 20 CFR
404.1526 and 416.926. An adjudicator
must provide a rationale for a finding of
medical equivalence in a decision that
is sufficient for a subsequent reviewer or
court to understand the decision.
Generally, this will entail the
adjudicator identifying the specific
listing section involved, articulating
how the record does not meet the
requirements of the listed
impairment(s), and how the record,
including ME or medical support staff
evidence, establishes an impairment of
equivalent severity.
Similarly, an adjudicator at the
hearings or AC level must consider all
evidence in making a finding that an
individual’s impairment(s) does not
medically equal a listing. If an
adjudicator at the hearings or AC level
believes that the evidence already
received in the record does not
reasonably support a finding that the
individual’s impairment(s) medically
equals a listed impairment, the
adjudicator is not required to articulate
specific evidence supporting his or her
finding that the individual’s
impairment(s) does not medically equal
a listed impairment. Generally, a
statement that the individual’s
impairment(s) does not medically equal
a listed impairment constitutes
sufficient articulation for this finding.
An adjudicator’s articulation of the
reason(s) why the individual is or is not
disabled at a later step in the sequential
evaluation process will provide
rationale that is sufficient for a
subsequent reviewer or court to
determine the basis for the finding about
medical equivalence at step 3.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This SSR is
effective on March 27, 2017.
CROSS-REFERENCES: 20 CFR
404.1526 and 416.926.
[FR Doc. 2017–05959 Filed 3–24–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191–02–P
Articulation requirements
An adjudicator at the hearings or AC
level must consider all evidence in
making a finding that an individual’s
impairment(s) medically equals a
listing. To make a finding of medical
equivalence, the adjudicator must
articulate how the record establishes
medical equivalency using one of the
equivalence that an adjudicator is able to consider.
In these situations, the adjudicator may find that an
individual’s impairment(s) medically equals a listed
impairment using the second or third method, but
not the first method. In these situations, the
adjudicator is not required to obtain ME evidence
or medical support staff input before making a
finding that the claimant’s impairment(s) do not
medically equal a listing.
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice: 9929]
Notice of Stakeholder Consultations
on Responsible Conflict Mineral
Sourcing
Department of State.
Notice; solicitation of
comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The United States announces
that the United States remains
committed to working with our partners
to break the links between armed groups
and the minerals trade in the
Democratic Republic of Congo and other
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27MRN1.SGM
27MRN1
15266
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 57 / Monday, March 27, 2017 / Notices
countries in the Great Lakes Region of
Africa. The United States has played a
leading role encouraging responsible
sourcing and supply chain management
in the minerals sector in this region as
part of broader U.S. efforts to support
peace and security, and to ensure that
the region’s resource wealth helps
advance broad, inclusive, and
sustainable socio-economic
development. The U.S. Department of
State (Department), along with other
agencies and departments is seeking
input from stakeholders to inform
recommendations of how best to
support responsible sourcing of tin,
tantalum, tungsten and gold.
The Department will consider
requests and comments received or
postmarked by April 28, 2017.
DATES:
Parties may submit input or
request stakeholder consultations to:
ConflictMineral@state.gov. If sent by
mail, written comments should be
addressed to: Ms. Elizabeth Orlando,
U.S. Department of State, 2201 C Street
NW., Room 3843, Washington, DC
20520. All comments should include a
contact person.
All comments received during this
comment period will be part of the
official record and may become public,
no matter how initially submitted.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Details on the SEC Final Rule on
Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act are
available on the following Web site:
https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2012/
34-67716.pdf. Information on the
Department’s commitment to
international responsible sourcing
standards is available on the following
Web sites: https://www.state.gov/
documents/organization/168851.pdf,
https://www.oecd.org/corporate/mne/
mining.htm.
Please refer to this Web site or contact
Ms. Elizabeth Orlando at the address
listed in the Addresses section of this
notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Determined to break the link between
armed groups and minerals in the Africa
Great Lakes Region, in 2010 Congress
enacted Section 1502 of the Wall Street
Consumer Reform and Protection Act of
2010. That law requires the Securities
and Exchange Commission to
promulgate regulations requiring
approximately 6,000 companies listed
on U.S. exchanges to annually disclose
to the SEC whether any ‘‘conflict
minerals’’ (tin, tantalum, tungsten and
gold) necessary to the functionality or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:02 Mar 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
production of a product are from the
DRC or nine adjacent countries.
Andrew Weinschenk,
Director, Office of Threat Finance
Countermeasures, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2017–05972 Filed 3–24–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–AE–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 9927]
Advisory Committee on Historical
Diplomatic Documentation—Notice of
Closed and Open Meeting for 2017
The Advisory Committee on
Historical Diplomatic Documentation
will meet on May 15, 2017, in open
session to discuss unclassified matters
concerning declassification and transfer
of Department of State records to the
National Archives and Records
Administration and the status of the
Foreign Relations series.
The Committee will meet in open
session from 9:30 a.m. until 10:30 a.m.
in SA–4D Conference Room,
Department of State, 2300 E Street NW.,
Washington DC, 20372 (Potomac Navy
Hill Annex). RSVP should be sent not
later than May 8, 2017. Requests for
reasonable accommodation should be
made by May 1, 2017. Requests made
after that date will be considered, but
might not be possible to fulfill.
Closed Session. The Committee’s
session in the afternoon of Monday,
May 15, 2017 will be closed in
accordance with Section 10(d) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public
Law 92–463). The agenda calls for
review of classified documentation
concerning the Foreign Relations series
and other declassification issues. These
are matters properly classified and not
subject to public disclosure under 5
U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and the public interest
requires that such activities be withheld
from disclosure.
RSVP Instructions. Prior notification
and a valid government-issued photo ID
(such as driver’s license, passport, U.S.
Government or military ID) are required
for entrance into the Department of
State building. Members of the public
planning to attend the open meetings
should RSVP, by the dates indicated
above, to Julie Fort, Office of the
Historian (202–955–0214). When
responding, please provide date of birth,
valid government-issued photo
identification number and type (such as
driver’s license number/state, passport
number/country, or U.S. Government ID
number/agency or military ID number/
branch), and relevant telephone
numbers. If you cannot provide one of
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the specified forms of ID, please consult
with Julie Fort for acceptable alternative
forms of picture identification.
Personal data is requested pursuant to
Public Law 99–399 (Omnibus
Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism
Act of 1986), as amended; Public Law
107–56 (USA PATRIOT Act); and
Executive Order 13356. The purpose of
the collection is to validate the identity
of individuals who enter Department
facilities. The data will be entered into
the Visitor Access Control System
(VACS–D) database. Please see the
Security Records System of Records
Notice (State-36) at https://
foia.state.gov/_docs/SORN/State-36.pdf,
for additional information.
Questions concerning the meeting
should be directed to Dr. Stephen P.
Randolph, Executive Secretary,
Advisory Committee on Historical
Diplomatic Documentation, Department
of State, Office of the Historian,
Washington, DC 20372, telephone (202)
955–0214, (email history@state.gov).
Note that requests for reasonable
accommodation received after the date
indicated in this notice will be
considered, but might not be possible to
fulfill.
Stephen P. Randolph,
Executive Secretary, Advisory Committee on
Historical, Diplomatic Documentation.
[FR Doc. 2017–05906 Filed 3–24–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice: 9780]
60-Day Notice of Proposed Information
Collection: Medical History and
Examination for Foreign Service
Notice of request for public
comment.
ACTION:
The Department of State is
seeking Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approval for the
information collection described below.
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, we are
requesting comments on this collection
from all interested individuals and
organizations. The purpose of this
notice is to allow 60 days for public
comment preceding submission of the
collection to OMB.
DATES: The Department will accept
comments from the public up to May
26, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• Web: Persons with access to the
Internet may comment on this notice by
going to www.Regulations.gov. You can
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27MRN1.SGM
27MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 57 (Monday, March 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15265-15266]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05972]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice: 9929]
Notice of Stakeholder Consultations on Responsible Conflict
Mineral Sourcing
AGENCY: Department of State.
ACTION: Notice; solicitation of comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States announces that the United States remains
committed to working with our partners to break the links between armed
groups and the minerals trade in the Democratic Republic of Congo and
other
[[Page 15266]]
countries in the Great Lakes Region of Africa. The United States has
played a leading role encouraging responsible sourcing and supply chain
management in the minerals sector in this region as part of broader
U.S. efforts to support peace and security, and to ensure that the
region's resource wealth helps advance broad, inclusive, and
sustainable socio-economic development. The U.S. Department of State
(Department), along with other agencies and departments is seeking
input from stakeholders to inform recommendations of how best to
support responsible sourcing of tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold.
DATES: The Department will consider requests and comments received or
postmarked by April 28, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Parties may submit input or request stakeholder
consultations to: ConflictMineral@state.gov. If sent by mail, written
comments should be addressed to: Ms. Elizabeth Orlando, U.S. Department
of State, 2201 C Street NW., Room 3843, Washington, DC 20520. All
comments should include a contact person.
All comments received during this comment period will be part of
the official record and may become public, no matter how initially
submitted.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Details on the SEC Final Rule on
Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act are available on the following Web
site: https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2012/34-67716.pdf. Information on
the Department's commitment to international responsible sourcing
standards is available on the following Web sites: https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/168851.pdf, https://www.oecd.org/corporate/mne/mining.htm.
Please refer to this Web site or contact Ms. Elizabeth Orlando at
the address listed in the Addresses section of this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Determined to break the link between armed
groups and minerals in the Africa Great Lakes Region, in 2010 Congress
enacted Section 1502 of the Wall Street Consumer Reform and Protection
Act of 2010. That law requires the Securities and Exchange Commission
to promulgate regulations requiring approximately 6,000 companies
listed on U.S. exchanges to annually disclose to the SEC whether any
``conflict minerals'' (tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold) necessary to
the functionality or production of a product are from the DRC or nine
adjacent countries.
Andrew Weinschenk,
Director, Office of Threat Finance Countermeasures, Department of
State.
[FR Doc. 2017-05972 Filed 3-24-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-AE-P
