[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43640-43644]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17936]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

[Docket No. SSA-2011-0021]


Social Security Ruling, SSR 12-2p; Titles II and XVI: Evaluation 
of Fibromyalgia

AGENCY: Social Security Administration.

ACTION: Notice of Social Security Ruling (SSR).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with 20 CFR 402.35(b)(1), the Commissioner of 
Social Security gives notice of Social Security Ruling, SSR 12-2p. This 
ruling provides guidance on how we develop evidence to establish that a 
person has a medically determinable impairment of fibromyalgia, and how 
we evaluate fibromyalgia in disability claims and continuing disability 
reviews under titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act.

DATES: Effective Date: July 25, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cheryl Williams, Office of Disability 
Programs, Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard, 
Baltimore, Maryland 21235-6401, (410) 965-1020.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Although we are not required to do so 
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(1) and (a)(2), we are publishing this SSR 
in accordance with 20 CFR 402.35(b)(1).
    Through SSRs, we make available to the public precedential 
decisions relating to the Federal old-age, survivors, disability, 
supplemental security income, special veterans benefits, and black lung 
benefits programs. We may base SSRs on determinations or decisions made 
at all levels of administrative adjudication, Federal court decisions, 
Commissioner's decisions, opinions of the Office of the General 
Counsel, or other interpretations of the law and regulations.
    Although SSRs do not have the same force and effect as statutes or 
regulations, they are binding on all components of the Social Security 
Administration. 20 CFR 402.35(b)(1).

[[Page 43641]]

    This SSR will be in effect until we publish a notice in the Federal 
Register that rescinds it, or publish a new SSR that replaces or 
modifies it.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, Program Nos. 96.001, Social 
Security--Disability Insurance; 96.002, Social Security--Retirement 
Insurance; 96.004--Social Security--Survivors Insurance; 96.006--
Supplemental Security Income)

Michael J. Astrue,
Commissioner of Social Security.

Policy Interpretation Ruling

Titles II and XVI: Evaluation of Fibromyalgia

    Purpose: This Social Security Ruling (SSR) provides guidance on how 
we develop evidence to establish that a person has a medically 
determinable impairment (MDI) of fibromyalgia (FM), and how we evaluate 
FM in disability claims and continuing disability reviews under titles 
II and XVI of the Social Security Act (Act).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For simplicity, we refer in this SSR only to initial claims 
for benefits made by adults (individuals who are at least age 18). 
However, the policy interpretations in this SSR also apply to claims 
for benefits made by children (individuals under age 18) under title 
XVI of the Act and to claims above the initial level. FM can affect 
children, and the signs and symptoms are essentially the same in 
children as adults. The policy interpretations in this SSR also 
apply to continuing disability reviews of adults and children under 
sections 223(f) and 1614(a)(4) of the Act, and to redeterminations 
of eligibility for benefits we make in accordance with section 
1614(a)(3)(H) of the Act when a child who is receiving title XVI 
childhood disability benefits attains age 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Citations: Sections 216(i), 223(d), 223(f), 1614(a)(3), and 
1614(a)(4) of the Act, as amended; Regulations No. 4, subpart P, 
sections 404.1505, 404.1508-404.1513, 404.1519a, 404.1520, 404.1520a, 
404.1521, 404.1523, 404.1526, 404.1527-404.1529, 404.1545, 404.1560-
404.1569a, 404.1593, 404.1594, appendix 1, and appendix 2; and 
Regulations No. 16, subpart I, sections 416.905, 416.906, 416.908-
416.913, 416.919a, 416.920, 416.920a, 416.921, 416.923, 416.924, 
416.924a, 416.926, 416.926a, 416.927-416.929, 416.945, 416.960-
416.969a, 416.987, 416.993, 416.994, and 416.994a.

Introduction

    FM is a complex medical condition characterized primarily by 
widespread pain in the joints, muscles, tendons, or nearby soft tissues 
that has persisted for at least 3 months. FM is a common syndrome.\2\ 
When a person seeks disability benefits due in whole or in part to FM, 
we must properly consider the person's symptoms when we decide whether 
the person has an MDI of FM. As with any claim for disability benefits, 
before we find that a person with an MDI of FM is disabled, we must 
ensure there is sufficient objective evidence to support a finding that 
the person's impairment(s) so limits the person's functional abilities 
that it precludes him or her from performing any substantial gainful 
activity. In this Ruling, we describe the evidence we need to establish 
an MDI of FM and explain how we evaluate this impairment when we 
determine whether the person is disabled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. 
National Library of Medicine, Fibromyalgia, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001463.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Policy Interpretation

    FM is an MDI when it is established by appropriate medical 
evidence. FM can be the basis for a finding of disability.
    I. What general criteria can establish that a person has an MDI of 
FM? Generally, a person can establish that he or she has an MDI of FM 
by providing evidence from an acceptable medical source.\3\ A licensed 
physician (a medical or osteopathic doctor) is the only acceptable 
medical source who can provide such evidence. We cannot rely upon the 
physician's diagnosis alone. The evidence must document that the 
physician reviewed the person's medical history and conducted a 
physical exam. We will review the physician's treatment notes to see if 
they are consistent with the diagnosis of FM, determine whether the 
person's symptoms have improved, worsened, or remained stable over 
time, and establish the physician's assessment over time of the 
person's physical strength and functional abilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 20 CFR 404.1513(a) and 416.913(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    II. What specific criteria can establish that a person has an MDI 
of FM? We will find that a person has an MDI of FM if the physician 
diagnosed FM and provides the evidence we describe in section II.A. or 
section II. B., and the physician's diagnosis is not inconsistent with 
the other evidence in the person's case record. These sections provide 
two sets of criteria for diagnosing FM, which we generally base on the 
1990 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Criteria for the 
Classification of Fibromyalgia \4\ (the criteria in section II.A.), or 
the 2010 ACR Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria \5\ (the criteria in 
section II.B.). If we cannot find that the person has an MDI of FM but 
there is evidence of another MDI, we will not evaluate the impairment 
under this Ruling. Instead, we will evaluate it under the rules that 
apply for that impairment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Frederick Wolfe et al., The American College of 
Rheumatology 1990 Criteria for the Classification of Fibromyalgia: 
Report of the Multicenter Criteria Committee, 33 Arthritis and 
Rheumatism 160 (1990), available at http://www.rheumatology.org/practice/clinical/classification/fibromyalgia/1990_Criteria_for_Classification_Fibro.pdf.
    \5\ See Frederick Wolfe et al., The American College of 
Rheumatology Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia and 
Measurement of Symptom Severity, 62 Arthritis Care & Research 600 
(2010), available at http://www.rheumatology.org/practice/clinical/classification/fibromyalgia/2010_Preliminary_Diagnostic_Criteria.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A. The 1990 ACR Criteria for the Classification of Fibromyalgia. 
Based on these criteria, we may find that a person has an MDI of FM if 
he or she has all three of the following:
    1. A history of widespread pain--that is, pain in all quadrants of 
the body (the right and left sides of the body, both above and below 
the waist) and axial skeletal pain (the cervical spine, anterior chest, 
thoracic spine, or low back)--that has persisted (or that persisted) 
for at least 3 months. The pain may fluctuate in intensity and may not 
always be present.
    2. At least 11 positive tender points on physical examination (see 
diagram below). The positive tender points must be found bilaterally 
(on the left and right sides of the body) and both above and below the 
waist.
    a. The 18 tender point sites are located on each side of the body 
at the:
     Occiput (base of the skull);
     Low cervical spine (back and side of the neck);
     Trapezius muscle (shoulder);
     Supraspinatus muscle (near the shoulder blade);
     Second rib (top of the rib cage near the sternum or breast 
bone);
     Lateral epicondyle (outer aspect of the elbow);
     Gluteal (top of the buttock);
     Greater trochanter (below the hip); and
     Inner aspect of the knee.
    b. In testing the tender-point sites,\6\ the physician should 
perform digital palpation with an approximate force of 9 pounds 
(approximately the amount of pressure needed to blanch the thumbnail of 
the examiner). The physician considers a tender point to be positive if 
the person experiences any pain when applying this amount of pressure 
to the site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ We may use the criteria in section II.B. of this SSR to 
determine an MDI of FM if the case record does not include a report 
of the results of tender-point testing, or the report does not 
describe the number and location on the body of the positive tender 
points.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Evidence that other disorders that could cause the symptoms or 
signs were excluded. Other physical and mental disorders may have 
symptoms or signs that are the same or similar to those

[[Page 43642]]

resulting from FM.\7\ Therefore, it is common in cases involving FM to 
find evidence of examinations and testing that rule out other disorders 
that could account for the person's symptoms and signs. Laboratory 
testing may include imaging and other laboratory tests (for example, 
complete blood counts, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, anti-nuclear 
antibody, thyroid function, and rheumatoid factor).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Some examples of other disorders that may have symptoms or 
signs that are the same or similar to those resulting from FM 
include rheumatologic disorders, myofacial pain syndrome, 
polymyalgia rheumatica, chronic Lyme disease, and cervical 
hyperextension-associated or hyperflexion-associated disorders.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN25JY12.000

    B. The 2010 ACR Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria. Based on these 
criteria, we may find that a person has an MDI of FM if he or she has 
all three of the following criteria \8\:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ We adapted the criteria from the 2010 ACR Preliminary 
Diagnostic Criteria because the Act and our regulations require a 
claimant for disability benefits to establish by objective medical 
evidence that he or she has a medically determinable impairment. See 
sections 223(d)(5)(A) and 1614(a)(3)(D) of the Act; 20 CFR 404.1508 
and 416.908; SSR 96-4p: Titles II and XVI: Symptoms, Medically 
Determinable Physical and Mental Impairments, and Exertional and 
Nonexertional Limitations, 61 FR 34488 (July 2, 1996) (also 
available at: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/rulings/di/01/SSR96-04-di-01.html).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. A history of widespread pain (see section II.A.1.);
    2. Repeated manifestations of six or more FM symptoms, signs,\9\ or 
co-occurring conditions,\10\ especially manifestations of fatigue, 
cognitive or memory problems (``fibro fog''), waking unrefreshed,\11\ 
depression, anxiety disorder, or irritable bowel syndrome; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Symptoms and signs that may be considered include the 
``(s)omatic symptoms'' referred to in Table No. 4, ``Fibromyalgia 
diagnostic criteria,'' in the 2010 ACR Preliminary Diagnostic 
Criteria. We consider some of the ``somatic symptoms'' listed in 
Table No. 4 to be ``signs'' under 20 CFR 404.1528(b) and 416.928(b). 
These ``somatic symptoms'' include muscle pain, irritable bowel 
syndrome, fatigue or tiredness, thinking or remembering problems, 
muscle weakness, headache, pain or cramps in the abdomen, numbness 
or tingling, dizziness, insomnia, depression, constipation, pain in 
the upper abdomen, nausea, nervousness, chest pain, blurred vision, 
fever, diarrhea, dry mouth, itching, wheezing, Raynaud's phenomenon, 
hives or welts, ringing in the ears, vomiting, heartburn, oral 
ulcers, loss of taste, change in taste, seizures, dry eyes, 
shortness of breath, loss of appetite, rash, sun sensitivity, 
hearing difficulties, easy bruising, hair loss, frequent urination, 
or bladder spasms.
    \10\ Some co-occurring conditions that may be considered are 
referred to in Table No. 4, ``Fibromyalgia diagnostic criteria,'' in 
the 2010 ACR Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria as ``somatic 
symptoms,'' such as irritable bowel syndrome or depression. Other 
co-occurring conditions, which are not listed in Table No. 4, may 
also be considered, such as anxiety disorder, chronic fatigue 
syndrome, irritable bladder syndrome, interstitial cystitis, 
temporomandibular joint disorder, gastroesophageal reflux disorder, 
migraine, or restless leg syndrome.
    \11\ ``Waking unrefreshed'' may be indicated in the case record 
by the person's statements describing a history of non-restorative 
sleep, such as statements about waking up tired or having difficulty 
remaining awake during the day, or other statements or evidence in 
the record reflecting that the person has a history of non-
restorative sleep.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Evidence that other disorders that could cause these repeated 
manifestations of symptoms, signs, or co-occurring conditions were 
excluded (see section II.A.3.).

III. What documentation do we need?

A. General

    1. As in all claims for disability benefits, we need objective 
medical evidence to establish the presence of an MDI. When a person 
alleges FM, longitudinal records reflecting ongoing medical evaluation 
and treatment from acceptable medical sources are especially helpful in 
establishing both the existence and severity of the impairment. In 
cases involving FM, as in any case, we will make every reasonable 
effort to obtain all available, relevant evidence to ensure appropriate 
and thorough evaluation.
    2. We will generally request evidence for the 12-month period 
before the date of application unless we have reason to believe that we 
need evidence from an

[[Page 43643]]

earlier period, or unless the alleged onset of disability is less than 
12 months before the date of application.\12\ In the latter case, we 
may still request evidence from before the alleged onset date if we 
have reason to believe that it could be relevant to a finding about the 
existence, severity, or duration of the disorder, or to establish the 
onset of disability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 20 CFR 404.1512(d) and 416.912(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Other Sources of Evidence

    1. In addition to obtaining evidence from a physician, we may 
request evidence from other acceptable medical sources, such as 
psychologists, both to determine whether the person has another MDI(s) 
and to evaluate the severity and functional effects of FM or any of the 
person's other impairments. We also may consider evidence from medical 
sources who are not ``acceptable medical sources'' to evaluate the 
severity and functional effects of the impairment(s).
    2. Under our regulations and SSR 06-3p,\13\ information from 
nonmedical sources can also help us evaluate the severity and 
functional effects of a person's FM. This information may help us to 
assess the person's ability to function day-to-day and over time. It 
may also help us when we make findings about the credibility of the 
person's allegations about symptoms and their effects.\14\ Examples of 
nonmedical sources include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 20 CFR 404.1513(d)(4), 416.913(d)(4); SSR 06-3p: Titles 
II and XVI: Considering Opinions and Other Evidence from Sources Who 
Are Not ``Acceptable Medical Sources'' in Disability Claims, 71 FR 
45593 (August 9, 2006), (also available at: http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/rulings/di/01/SSR2006-03-di-01.html).
    \14\ See section IV below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. Neighbors, friends, relatives, and clergy; and
    b. Past employers, rehabilitation counselors, and teachers; and
    c. Statements from SSA personnel who interviewed the person.

C. When There Is Insufficient Evidence for Us To Determine Whether the 
Person Has an MDI of FM or Is Disabled

    1. We may take one or more actions to try to resolve the 
insufficiency: \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 20 CFR 404.1520b(c) and 416.920b(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. We may recontact the person's treating or other source(s) to see 
if the information we need is available;
    b. We may request additional existing records;
    c. We may ask the person or others for more information; or
    d. If the evidence is still insufficient to determine whether the 
person has an MDI of FM or is disabled despite our efforts to obtain 
additional evidence, we may make a determination or decision based on 
the evidence we have.
    2. We may purchase a consultative examination (CE) at our expense 
to determine if a person has an MDI of FM or is disabled when we need 
this information to adjudicate the case.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See 20 CFR 404.1520b(c)(3), and 416.920b(c)(3). We may 
purchase a CE without recontacting a person's treating or other 
sources if the source cannot provide the necessary information, or 
the information is not available from the source. See 20 CFR 
404.1519a(b), and 416.919a(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. We will not purchase a CE solely to determine if a person has FM 
in addition to another MDI that could account for his or her symptoms.
    b. We may purchase a CE to help us assess the severity and 
functional effects of medically determined FM or any other 
impairment(s). If necessary, we may purchase a CE to help us determine 
whether the impairment(s) meets the duration requirement.
    c. Because the symptoms and signs of FM may vary in severity over 
time and may even be absent on some days, it is important that the 
medical source who conducts the CE has access to longitudinal 
information about the person. However, we may rely on the CE report 
even if the person who conducts the CE did not have access to 
longitudinal evidence if we determine that the CE is the most probative 
evidence in the case record.
    IV. How do we evaluate a person's statements about his or her 
symptoms and functional limitations? We follow the two-step process set 
forth in our regulations and in SSR 96-7p.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 20 CFR 404.1529(b) and (c) and 416.929(b) and (c); SSR 
96-7p: Titles II and XVI: Evaluation of Symptoms in Disability 
Claims: Assessing the Credibility of an Individual's Statements, 61 
FR 34483 (July 2, 1996) (also available at: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/rulings/di/01/SSR96-07-di-01.html).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A. First step of the symptom evaluation process. There must be 
medical signs and findings that show the person has an MDI(s) which 
could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms 
alleged. FM which we determined to be an MDI satisfies the first step 
of our two-step process for evaluating symptoms.
    B. Second step of the symptom evaluation process. Once an MDI is 
established, we then evaluate the intensity and persistence of the 
person's pain or any other symptoms and determine the extent to which 
the symptoms limit the person's capacity for work. If objective medical 
evidence does not substantiate the person's statements about the 
intensity, persistence, and functionally limiting effects of symptoms, 
we consider all of the evidence in the case record, including the 
person's daily activities, medications or other treatments the person 
uses, or has used, to alleviate symptoms; the nature and frequency of 
the person's attempts to obtain medical treatment for symptoms; and 
statements by other people about the person's symptoms. As we explain 
in SSR 96-7p, we will make a finding about the credibility of the 
person's statements regarding the effects of his or her symptoms on 
functioning. We will make every reasonable effort to obtain available 
information that could help us assess the credibility of the person's 
statements.
    V. How do we find a person disabled based on an MDI of FM? Once we 
establish that a person has an MDI of FM, we will consider it in the 
sequential evaluation process to determine whether the person is 
disabled. As we explain in section VI. below, we consider the severity 
of the impairment, whether the impairment medically equals the 
requirements of a listed impairment, and whether the impairment 
prevents the person from doing his or her past relevant work or other 
work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy.
    VI. How do we consider FM in the sequential evaluation process? 
\18\ As with any adult claim for disability benefits, we use a 5-step 
sequential evaluation process to determine whether an adult with an MDI 
of FM is disabled.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ As we have already noted, we refer in this SSR only to 
adult disability claims, but the guidance in the SSR applies to all 
disability cases under titles II and XVI involving FM. We use 
different sequential evaluation processes for claims of children 
under title XVI and in continuing disability reviews of adults and 
children under titles II and XVI. See 20 CFR 404.1594, 416.924, 
416.994, and 416.994a. We also use a modification of the 5-step 
sequential evaluation process for adults in 20 CFR 416.920 when we 
do age-18 redeterminations under title XVI. See 20 CFR 416.987.
    \19\ See 20 CFR 404.1520 and 416.920.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A. At step 1, we consider the person's work activity. If a person 
with FM is doing substantial gainful activity, we find that he or she 
is not disabled.
    B. At step 2, we consider whether the person has a ``severe'' 
MDI(s). If we find that the person has an MDI that could reasonably be 
expected to produce the pain or other symptoms the person alleges, we 
will consider those symptom(s) in deciding whether the person's 
impairment(s) is severe. If the person's pain or other symptoms cause a 
limitation or restriction that has more than a minimal effect on the 
ability to perform basic work activities, we will

[[Page 43644]]

find that the person has a severe impairment(s).\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See SSR 96-3p: Titles II and XVI: Considering Allegations 
of Pain and Other Symptoms in Determining Whether a Medically 
Determinable Impairment is Severe, 61 FR 34468 (July 2, 1996) (also 
available at: http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/rulings/di/01/SSR96-03-di-01.html).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    C. At step 3, we consider whether the person's impairment(s) meets 
or medically equals the criteria of any of the listings in the Listing 
of Impairments in appendix 1, subpart P of 20 CFR part 404 (appendix 
1). FM cannot meet a listing in appendix 1 because FM is not a listed 
impairment. At step 3, therefore, we determine whether FM medically 
equals a listing (for example, listing 14.09D in the listing for 
inflammatory arthritis), or whether it medically equals a listing in 
combination with at least one other medically determinable impairment.
    D. Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) assessment: In our 
regulations and SSR 96-8p,\21\ we explain that we assess a person's RFC 
when the person's impairment(s) does not meet or equal a listed 
impairment. We base our RFC assessment on all relevant evidence in the 
case record. We consider the effects of all of the person's medically 
determinable impairments, including impairments that are ``not 
severe.'' For a person with FM, we will consider a longitudinal record 
whenever possible because the symptoms of FM can wax and wane so that a 
person may have ``bad days and good days.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See 20 CFR 404.1520(e), 416.920(e); SSR 96-8p: Titles II 
and XVI: Assessing Residual Functional Capacity in Initial Claims, 
61 FR 34474 (July 2, 1996) (also available at: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/rulings/di/01/SSR96-08-di-01.html).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    E. At steps 4 and 5, we use our RFC assessment to determine whether 
the person is capable of doing any past relevant work (step 4) or any 
other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy 
(step 5). If the person is able to do any past relevant work, we find 
that he or she is not disabled. If the person is not able to do any 
past relevant work or does not have such work experience, we determine 
whether he or she can do any other work. The usual vocational 
considerations apply.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See 20 CFR 404.1560-404.1569a and 416.960-416.969a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Widespread pain and other symptoms associated with FM, such as 
fatigue, may result in exertional limitations that prevent a person 
from doing the full range of unskilled work in one or more of the 
exertional categories in appendix 2 of subpart P of part 404 (appendix 
2).\23\ People with FM may also have nonexertional physical or mental 
limitations because of their pain or other symptoms.\24\ Some may have 
environmental restrictions, which are also nonexertional.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See SSR 83-12: Title 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 (available at http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/rulings/di/02/SSR83-12-di-02.html).
    \24\ See SSR 85-15: Titles II and XVI: Capability To Do Other 
Work--The Medical-Vocational Rules as a Framework for Evaluating 
Solely Nonexertional Impairments (available at: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/rulings/di/02/SSR85-15-di-02.html); 
and SSR 96-4p.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Adjudicators must be alert to the possibility that there may be 
exertional or nonexertional (for example, postural or environmental) 
limitations that erode a person's occupational base sufficiently to 
preclude the use of a rule in appendix 2 to direct a decision. In such 
cases, adjudicators must use the rules in appendix 2 as a framework for 
decision-making and may need to consult a vocational resource.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See SSR 83-12; 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 
(available at http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/rulings/di/02/SSR83-14-di-02.html); SSR 85-15; and SSR 96-9p, 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, 61 
FR 34478 (July 2, 1996) (also available at: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/rulings/di/01/SSR96-09-di-01.html).

DATES: Effective Date: This SSR is effective on July 25, 2012.
    Cross-References: SSR 82-63: Titles II and XVI: Medical-Vocational 
Profiles Showing an Inability To Make an Adjustment to Other Work; SSR 
83-12: Title 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; 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 85-15: Titles II and XVI: Capability To Do Other 
Work--The Medical-Vocational Rules as a Framework for Evaluating Solely 
Nonexertional Impairments; SSR 96-3p: Titles II and XVI: Considering 
Allegations of Pain and Other Symptoms in Determining Whether a 
Medically Determinable Impairment is Severe; SSR 96-4p: Policy 
Interpretation Ruling Titles II and XVI: Symptoms, Medically 
Determinable Physical and Mental Impairments, and Exertional and 
Nonexertional Limitations; SSR 96-7p: Titles II and XVI: Evaluation of 
Symptoms in Disability Claims: Assessing the Credibility of an 
Individual's Statements; SSR 96-8p: Titles II and XVI: Assessing 
Residual Functional Capacity in Initial Claims; SSR 96-9p, 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; SSR 99-2p: Titles II and XVI: Evaluating Cases Involving Chronic 
Fatigue Syndrome (CFS); SSR 02-2p: Titles II and XVI: Evaluation of 
Interstitial Cystitis; and SSR 06-3p: Titles II and XVI: Considering 
Opinions and Other Evidence from Sources Who Are Not ``Acceptable 
Medical Sources'' in Disability Claims; Considering Decisions on 
Disability by Other Governmental and Nongovernmental Agencies; and 
Program Operations Manual System (POMS) DI 22505.001, DI 22505.003, DI 
24510.057, DI 24515.012, DI 24515.061-DI 24515.063, DI 24515.075, DI 
24555.001, DI 25010.001, and DI 25025.001.

[FR Doc. 2012-17936 Filed 7-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191-02-P