Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee for Dog Management at Golden Gate National Recreation Area, 50871-50872 [E6-14205]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 166 / Monday, August 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules allowable by law, this rule meets the applicable standards of Subsections (a) and (b) of that Section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual language of State regulatory programs and program amendments since each such program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by OSM. Under Sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have been met. mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS Executive Order 13132—Federalism This rule does not have Federalism implications. SMCRA delineates the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations. One of the purposes of SMCRA is to ‘‘establish a nationwide program to protect society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal mining operations.’’ Section 503(a)(1) of SMCRA requires that State laws regulating surface coal mining and reclamation operations be ‘‘in accordance with’’ the requirements of SMCRA. Section 503(a)(7) requires that State programs contain rules and regulations ‘‘consistent with’’ regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA. Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the potential effects of this rule on Federallyrecognized Indian tribes and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. The basis for this determination is that our decision is on a State regulatory program and does not involve a Federal program involving Indian Tribes. Executive Order 13211—Regulations That Significantly Affect the Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 which requires agencies to prepare a Statement of VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:08 Aug 25, 2006 Jkt 208001 Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required. National Environmental Policy Act This rule does not require an environmental impact statement because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Paperwork Reduction Act This rule does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.). Regulatory Flexibility Act The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal that is the subject of this rule is based on counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small entities. In making the determination as to whether this rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C.804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, geographic regions, or Federal, State or local governmental agencies; and (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This determination is based upon the fact PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 50871 that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation was not considered a major rule. Unfunded Mandates This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an unfunded mandate. List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 938 Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining. Dated: August 3, 2006. Michael K. Robinson, Acting Regional Director, Appalachian Region. [FR Doc. E6–14229 Filed 8–25–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–05–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service 36 CFR Chapter 1 Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee for Dog Management at Golden Gate National Recreation Area National Park Service, Department of the Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. AGENCY: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770, 5 U.S.C. App 1, section 10), of the fifth meeting of the Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee for Dog Management at Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA). DATES: The Committee will meet on Thursday, September 21, 2006 in the Officer’s Club, upper Fort Mason. The meeting will begin at 3 p.m., and is open to the public. Although the Committee may modify its agenda during the course of its work, the proposed agenda for this meeting is as follows: agenda review; approval of July 31, 2006 meeting summary; update on activities since July meeting; discuss Technical Subcommittee report; discuss potential selection/evaluation criteria; next steps; public comment; adjourn. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 50872 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 166 / Monday, August 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules The Committee provides for a public comment period during the meeting; written comments may also be sent to: Superintendent, GGNRA, Ft. Mason, Bldg. 201, San Francisco, CA 94123, Attn: Negotiated Rulemaking. To request a sign language interpreter, please call the park TDD line (415) 556– 2766, at least a week in advance of the meeting. Please note that federal regulations prohibit pets in public buildings, with the exception of service animals. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Go to the http:// www.parkplanning.nps.gov/goga and select Negotiated Rulemaking for Dog Management at GGNRA or call the project information line at 415–561– 4728. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee was established pursuant to the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990 (5 U.S.C. 561–570) to consider developing a special regulation for dogwalking at GGNRA. Dated: August 15, 2006. Bernard C. Fagan, Acting Chief, Office of Policy. [FR Doc. E6–14205 Filed 8–25–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Part 21 RIN 2900–AM25 Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program—Initial Evaluations Department of Veterans Affairs. Proposed rule. AGENCY: ACTION: mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend regulations of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) concerning initial evaluations of individuals who apply for vocational rehabilitation and employment benefits. These proposed regulations are intended to reflect changes in law, VA’s interpretation of applicable law and its determinations of procedures appropriate for use in the initial evaluation, to improve readability, and to make other nonsubstantive changes. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:08 Aug 25, 2006 Jkt 208001 Comments must be received on or before October 27, 2006. ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted by: mail or hand-delivery to Director, Regulations Management (00REG1), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; fax to (202) 273–9026; or e-mail through http://www.Regulations.gov. Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900–AM25.’’ All comments received will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Room 1063B, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202) 273–9515 for an appointment. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Kruger, Senior Policy Analyst, (202) 273–7344, or Mark Hawkins, Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor, (202) 273–6923, Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service (28), Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20420. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We propose to amend VA’s regulations in 38 CFR Part 21, Subpart A—Vocational Rehabilitation Under 38 U.S.C. Chapter 31, concerning initial evaluations of individuals who apply for vocational rehabilitation and employment benefits. These proposed regulations are intended to reflect changes in law regarding initial evaluations and VA’s interpretation of applicable law and its determinations of procedures appropriate for use in the initial evaluation, and to improve readability. We also propose to make a nonsubstantive conforming change in 38 CFR Part 21, Subpart M—Vocational Training and Rehabilitation for Certain Children of Vietnam Veterans—Spina Bifida and Covered Birth Defects. In Davenport v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 476 (1995), the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (then the United States Court of Veterans Appeals) set aside VA regulations that require a veteran’s service-connected disability to cause the employment handicap or serious employment handicap that establishes the veteran’s entitlement to vocational rehabilitation DATES: PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 and employment benefits. The court held that the requirement of 38 CFR 21.51(c) that a veteran’s serviceconnected disability must ‘‘materially contribute’’ to the veteran’s employment handicap is inconsistent with 38 U.S.C. 3102. Thus, the court set aside § 21.51(c)(2), (e), (f)(1)(ii), and (f)(2) to the extent that they require a causal nexus between a veteran’s serviceconnected disability and that veteran’s employment handicap. The court found unlawful the noted provisions of § 21.51(c)(2), which require that, while a veteran’s service-connected disability need not be the sole or primary cause of an employment handicap or serious employment handicap, it must ‘‘materially contribute’’ to the handicap. On October 9, 1996, Congress enacted the Veterans’ Benefits Improvements Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–275), which redefined the terms ‘‘employment handicap’’ and ‘‘serious employment handicap’’ to include a requirement that an individual’s vocational impairment be one ‘‘resulting in substantial part from’’ one or more service-connected disabilities, with respect to applications received on or after the date of enactment. To reflect the dates of applicability of these changes in legal requirements, the proposed rule would provide that for determinations made on any applications filed on or after March 30, 1995, the date of the Davenport v. Brown decision, but before October 9, 1996, the individual’s service-connected disability(ies) need not contribute to the individual’s overall vocational impairment or significant vocational impairment. For clarification, the table below summarizes the standards used to determine entitlement to vocational rehabilitation and employment benefits and services for applicants during these three distinct time periods. These concern entitlement determinations made for: (1) Claims filed prior to the Davenport decision; (2) Claims filed after the Davenport decision but prior to enactment of Public Law 104–275; and (3) Claims filed following enactment of Public Law 104–275. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 166 (Monday, August 28, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50871-50872]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-14205]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

36 CFR Chapter 1


Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee for Dog Management at 
Golden Gate National Recreation Area

AGENCY: National Park Service, Department of the Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, in accordance with the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770, 5 U.S.C. App 1, 
section 10), of the fifth meeting of the Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory 
Committee for Dog Management at Golden Gate National Recreation Area 
(GGNRA).

DATES: The Committee will meet on Thursday, September 21, 2006 in the 
Officer's Club, upper Fort Mason. The meeting will begin at 3 p.m., and 
is open to the public.
    Although the Committee may modify its agenda during the course of 
its work, the proposed agenda for this meeting is as follows: agenda 
review; approval of July 31, 2006 meeting summary; update on activities 
since July meeting; discuss Technical Subcommittee report; discuss 
potential selection/evaluation criteria; next steps; public comment; 
adjourn.

[[Page 50872]]

    The Committee provides for a public comment period during the 
meeting; written comments may also be sent to: Superintendent, GGNRA, 
Ft. Mason, Bldg. 201, San Francisco, CA 94123, Attn: Negotiated 
Rulemaking.
    To request a sign language interpreter, please call the park TDD 
line (415) 556-2766, at least a week in advance of the meeting. Please 
note that federal regulations prohibit pets in public buildings, with 
the exception of service animals.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Go to the http://
www.parkplanning.nps.gov/goga and select Negotiated Rulemaking for Dog 
Management at GGNRA or call the project information line at 415-561-
4728.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee was established pursuant to 
the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990 (5 U.S.C. 561-570) to consider 
developing a special regulation for dogwalking at GGNRA.

    Dated: August 15, 2006.
Bernard C. Fagan,
Acting Chief, Office of Policy.
[FR Doc. E6-14205 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-FN-P