Authorization for Non-VA Medical Services, 76061-76063 [2013-29311]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 241 / Monday, December 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
that the amendment of this danger zone
has practically no economic impact on
the public, no anticipated navigational
hazard, or interference with existing
waterway traffic. This final rule will
have no significant economic impact on
small entities.
c. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act
Due to the administrative nature of
this action and because there is no
intended change in the use of the area,
the Corps determined this amendment
to the regulation will not have a
significant impact to the quality of the
human environment and, therefore,
preparation of an environmental impact
statement is not required. An
environmental assessment (EA) was
prepared after the public notice period
closed and all comments received from
the public were considered. The
environmental assessment may be
viewed at the District office listed at the
end of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section, above.
d. Unfunded Mandates Act
This final rule does not impose an
enforceable duty among the private
sector and, therefore, it is not a Federal
private sector mandate and it is not
subject to the requirements of either
Section 202 or Section 205 of the
Unfunded Mandates Act. The Corps has
also found under Section 203 of the Act,
that small governments will not be
significantly and uniquely affected by
this rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 334
Danger zones, Marine safety,
Navigation (water), Restricted areas,
Waterways.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Corps amends 33 CFR
part 334 as follows:
PART 334—DANGER ZONE AND
RESTRICTED AREA REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for 33 CFR
part 334 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1) and
40 Stat. 892 (33 U.S.C. 3).
2. Revise § 334.1390 to read as
follows:
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
§ 334.1390 Pacific Ocean off the Pacific
Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands,
Island of Kauai, Hawaii; danger zone.
(a) The danger zone. All navigable
waters within an area beginning at a
point on the shore at latitude
22°04′13.65″ N, longitude 159°46′30.76″
W; and continue south along the
shoreline to latitude 21°58′42.77″ N, and
longitude 159°45′26.35″ W. Thence
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:31 Dec 13, 2013
Jkt 232001
extending southwest to latitude
21°56′6.00″ N, and longitude
159°46′55.91″ W extending northwest to
latitude 21°58′59.81″ N and longitude
159°50′51.42″ W, continuing north to
latitude 22°02′28.09″ N, and longitude
159°51′28.15″ W, and continuing
northeast to latitude 22°06′ 30.71″ N,
longitude 159°49′20.43″ W; and thence
to point of beginning. All coordinates
reference 1983 North American Datum
(NAD 83).
(b) The regulations. (1) Dredging,
dragging, seining, and other similar
operations within the danger zone are
prohibited.
(2) All persons, boats, vessels, or other
craft are prohibited from entering,
transiting, or remaining within the
danger zone during range operations,
test and training activities, or increases
in force protection that pose a hazard to
the general public, as determined by the
enforcing agency. The enforcing
agency’s determination of the necessity
of closing the danger zone due to
increases in force protection will be
based on the Department of Defense
Force Protection Condition (FPCON)
System. From the lowest security level
to the highest, FPCON levels are titled
Normal, Alpha, Bravo, Charlie and
Delta.
(3) Closure of the danger zone will be
indicated by Notice to Mariners, the
presence of Pacific Missile Range
Facility range boats, beach markings
including beach signs along the north
and south beach borders alerting
shoreline foot traffic, security patrols,
and radio transmissions on common
ocean frequencies to include Marine
band channel 6 (156.300 Mhz), Marine
band channel 16 (156.800 Mhz), and CB
channel 22. The enforcing agency will
post the danger zone closure schedule
on its official Navy Web site, https://
www.cnic.navy.mil/PMRF/, and
Facebook page, https://
www.facebook.com/
PacificMissileRangeFacility. The danger
zone closure schedule may also be
obtained by calling the following phone
numbers: 808–335–4301, 808–335–
4388, and 808–335–4523.
(4) Consistent with paragraph (b)(2) of
this section, the enforcing agency is
authorized to prohibit access into the
danger zone by anyone, and all willful
violations of the enforcing agency’s
prohibitions are punishable under 33
U.S.C. 3.
(c) The enforcing agency. The
regulations in this section shall be
enforced by the Commanding Officer,
Pacific Missile Range Facility, Hawaii
and such agencies or persons as he or
she may designate.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76061
Dated: December 11, 2013.
James R. Hannon,
Chief, Operations and Regulatory Directorate
of Civil Works.
[FR Doc. 2013–29878 Filed 12–13–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720–58–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900–AO46
Authorization for Non-VA Medical
Services
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) rulemaking amends VA’s
regulations regarding payment by VA
for medical services under VA’s
statutory authority for non-VA medical
care. In the Federal Register on
November 28, 2012, VA proposed to
remove an outdated regulatory
limitation on veterans’ eligibility to be
referred for non-VA medical care. On
the same date, VA also published a
companion direct final rule that would
have made the same amendments
effective on January 28, 2013, if no
significant adverse comments were
received. Because VA received adverse
comments on the direct final rule, VA
is withdrawing it in a companion
document in this issue of the Federal
Register. This rulemaking includes VA’s
responses to comments on the proposed
and direct final rules.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective January 15, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa
Brown, Chief, Policy Management
Department, Department of Veterans
Affairs, Chief Business Office,
Purchased Care, 3773 Cherry Creek
North Drive, Suite 450, Denver, CO
80209 at (303) 331–7829. This is not a
toll-free number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 28, 2012, VA proposed a rule
in the Federal Register, at 77 FR 70967,
to amend its regulations authorizing
non-VA medical care. Under our nonVA medical care authority in 38 U.S.C.
1703, VA may provide certain hospital
care (inpatient care) and medical
services (outpatient care) for eligible
veterans when VA facilities are not
capable of providing economical
services due to geographical
inaccessibility or are not capable of
providing the services needed. VA
proposed to revise its existing
regulation, at 38 CFR 17.52(a)(2)(ii), to
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
76062
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 241 / Monday, December 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
remove a limitation that barred VA from
authorizing non-VA medical services for
certain veterans who had not previously
been furnished VA hospital care.
Without this revision, these veterans
were eligible for non-VA medical
services under § 17.52(a)(2)(ii) to
complete treatment of a nonserviceconnected disability only if they had
received VA hospital care for that
disability.
On the same date, VA published a
companion direct final rule at 77 FR
70893 that would have made the same
amendments as those in the proposed
rule effective on January 28, 2013, if no
adverse public comments were received.
The direct final rule and proposed rule
each provided a 30-day comment period
that ended on December 28, 2012. VA
received comments on the proposed
rule and direct final rule, including
some adverse comments. VA is,
therefore, withdrawing the direct final
rule in a companion document in this
issue of the Federal Register. VA
addresses comments received on both
the direct final and proposed rules in
this action.
This final rule adopts the proposed
rule without changes.
We received several comments urging
VA to expand eligibility for non-VA
medical care to allow all veterans the
option of using the program for any
needed treatment. VA lacks statutory
authority to make this change. VA may
provide non-VA medical care under 38
U.S.C. 1703 only in limited
circumstances: When VA cannot
provide economical hospital care or
medical services because of geographic
inaccessibility, or when VA facilities are
not capable of providing the hospital
care or medical services that a veteran
needs. See 38 U.S.C. 1703(a). Further, if
those conditions are met, VA has
authority to provide non-VA medical
care to a veteran only if the veteran
meets the eligibility requirements set
forth in section 1703. Thus, VA cannot
make the changes these commenters
request because to do so would be
contrary to VA’s statutory authority
under 38 U.S.C. 1703.
One commenter who recommended
that VA allow veterans to choose to
receive care from private providers also
stated that ‘‘VA hospitals should be for
emergency care and for those who are
having operations and need weeks or
months to recover, such as multi-trauma
cases,’’ suggesting that all other care
should be referred to non-VA providers.
We emphasize that the VA health care
system does provide emergency medical
services and hospital care to eligible
veterans, including surgical services and
acute inpatient polytrauma
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:31 Dec 13, 2013
Jkt 232001
rehabilitation, as recommended by the
commenter. By statute, the VA health
care system must also provide ‘‘a
complete medical and hospital service
for the medical care and treatment of
veterans’’ (38 U.S.C. 7301(b)) and
therefore cannot reduce the availability
of VA care in the manner suggested by
the commenter. VA makes no changes
based on this comment.
One commenter expressed support for
this regulation and stated that veterans
receiving non-VA emergency treatment
would not need to be transferred from
a non-VA hospital to a VA hospital to
complete treatment. This comment does
not accurately characterize the effect of
this rulemaking. To clarify, this action
only applies to the provision of non-VA
medical services after the veteran has
received VA care and the non-VA
medical services are needed to complete
the VA care.
One commenter stated that VA should
not ‘‘duplicat[e] medical services
readily available by well qualified
providers’’ and that ‘‘[m]any veterans
are forced by current VA practices to
utilize local medical services, even
though the services are in theory
available from the VA at other than a
‘local’ VA facility.’’ This comment can
be interpreted in two ways. One
interpretation is that some veterans are
forced to pay for their own care from
community providers in order to avoid
traveling when their local VA facilities
refer them to VA facilities located in
other geographic areas. Another
interpretation is that VA refers veterans
to community providers when care
would be better provided at a VA
facility. Neither interpretation is within
the scope of this rulemaking. VA
therefore does not make any changes to
this rulemaking based on these
comments.
The same commenter recommended
that veterans’ ‘‘expenses in utilizing
[Medicare] should be offset by VA
reimbursement.’’ We note that the VA
health care system and Medicare are
separate programs run under distinct
statutory authorities. VA has no
authority to reimburse Medicare
beneficiaries for expenses they incur to
obtain medical care under Medicare in
the manner suggested by the commenter
(see 42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)(3)). VA does not
make any changes based on this
comment.
One commenter asked whether this
rulemaking would result in additional
administrative burdens for veterans to
obtain referrals or for providers to
obtain payments for non-VA medical
care. This rulemaking only removes a
limitation; it does not create any new
burdens or procedures. VA’s regulations
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and policies pertaining to how veterans
obtain referrals and how VA processes
payments for non-VA medical care will
remain the same. There will be no
additional administrative burden on
veterans or non-VA providers as a result
of this rulemaking.
The majority of the comments that VA
received on this rulemaking requested
that VA allow hearing-aid specialists to
perform diagnostic hearing evaluations
for veterans. We received over one
hundred comments on this issue. Some
of the commenters requested to become
recognized VA providers. VA allows
only audiologists to perform such
evaluations. We are not aware of any
State that licenses hearing-aid
specialists to perform such evaluations.
VA will consider these comments
internally as appropriate, but the
request is outside the scope of this
rulemaking, so we make no changes
based on these comments.
VA received a comment expressing
support for the proposed rule, but
expressing concern about a draft request
for proposals issued by VA for the
procurement of non-VA medical care
surgical services. This rulemaking
affects only eligibility for non-VA
medical services, and not VA’s means of
procuring such services. This comment,
therefore, is outside of the scope of the
regulation, and we make no changes
based on it. VA will consider this
comment in its evaluation of the draft
request for proposals as appropriate.
VA received a comment expressing
support for the proposed rule, but
asking VA to remove ‘‘a burdensome
regulatory requirement that
prescriptions for veterans must be
written by a VA-affiliated provider for
the veteran to obtain the prescription at
the VA’s discounted price. Instead, the
VA should recognize the validity of a
community-based physician’s
prescription.’’ We do not make changes
based on this comment because the
issue is outside the scope of this
regulation. VA will consider the
recommendation internally as
appropriate.
VA received one comment expressing
support for the proposed rule and
requesting that physicians certified by
osteopathic boards of medicine be
included in all VA activities concerning
veterans’ healthcare. This comment is
outside the scope of this regulation, but
no change is required for VA to fulfill
the request because VA considers
doctors of osteopathic medicine as
physicians, and does not distinguish
between physicians based on their types
of degrees.
VA received one comment stating
‘‘[v]ote no.’’ Since the commenter did
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 241 / Monday, December 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
not state a reason for disagreeing with
this rulemaking, VA does not make any
changes based on this comment.
In addition to the comments
described above, VA received several
comments expressing general support
for the proposed rulemaking.
Based on the rationale set forth in the
proposed rule and in this document, VA
is adopting the provisions of the
proposed rule as a final rule with no
changes.
Effect of Rulemaking
Title 38 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as revised by this final
rulemaking, represents VA’s
implementation of its legal authority on
this subject. Other than future
amendments to this regulation or
governing statutes, no contrary guidance
or procedures are authorized. All
existing or subsequent VA guidance
must be read to conform with this
rulemaking if possible or, if not
possible, such guidance is superseded
by this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This final rule contains no provisions
constituting a collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3521).
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that
this final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities as they are
defined in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612. This final rule
directly affects only individuals and
will not directly affect small entities.
Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b),
this amendment is exempt from the
initial and final regulatory flexibility
analysis requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603
and 604.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, and other advantages;
distributive impacts; and equity).
Executive Order 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review)
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits,
reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and
promoting flexibility. Executive Order
12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review) defines a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ requiring review by
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:31 Dec 13, 2013
Jkt 232001
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) as ‘‘any regulatory action that is
likely to result in a rule that may: (1)
Have an annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or more or adversely
affect in a material way the economy, a
sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment,
public health or safety, or State, local,
or tribal governments or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency; (3)
Materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in this Executive
Order.’’
The economic, interagency,
budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this regulatory action
have been examined, and it has been
determined not to be a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866. VA’s impact analysis can be
found as a supporting document at
https://www.regulations.gov, usually
within 48 hours after the rulemaking
document is published. Additionally, a
copy of the rulemaking and its impact
analysis are available on VA’s Web site
at https://www1.va.gov/orpm/, by
following the link for ‘‘VA Regulations
Published.’’
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that
agencies prepare an assessment of
anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule that may result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
one year. This final rule will have no
such effect on State, local, and tribal
governments, or on the private sector.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance numbers and titles for the
programs affected by this document are
64.007, Blind Rehabilitation Centers;
64.008, Veterans Domiciliary Care;
64.009, Veterans Medical Care Benefits;
64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care;
64.011, Veterans Dental Care; 64.012,
Veterans Prescription Service; 64.013,
Veterans Prosthetic Appliances; 64.014,
Veterans State Domiciliary Care; 64.015,
Veterans State Nursing Home Care;
64.018, Sharing Specialized Medical
Resources; 64.019, Veterans
Rehabilitation Alcohol and Drug
Dependence; 64.022, Veterans Home
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
76063
Based Primary Care; and 64.024, VA
Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem
Program.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or
designee, approved this document and
authorized the undersigned to sign and
submit the document to the Office of the
Federal Register for publication
electronically as an official document of
the Department of Veterans Affairs. Jose
D. Riojas, Chief of Staff, Department of
Veterans Affairs, approved this
document on November 6, 2013 for
publication.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and
procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Claims, Day care, Dental health, Drug
abuse, Government contracts, Grant
programs—health, Government
programs—veterans, Health care, Health
facilities, Health professions, Health
records, Homeless, Mental health
programs, Nursing homes, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Veterans.
Dated: December 4, 2013.
Robert C. McFetridge,
Director, Regulation Policy and Management,
Office of the General Counsel, Department
of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Department of Veterans
Affairs amends 38 CFR part 17 as
follows:
PART 17—MEDICAL
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in
specific sections.
2. Revise § 17.52(a)(2)(ii) to read as
follows:
■
§ 17.52 Hospital care and medical services
in non-VA facilities.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) A veteran who has been furnished
hospital care, nursing home care,
domiciliary care, or medical services,
and requires medical services to
complete treatment incident to such
care or services (each authorization for
non-VA treatment needed to complete
treatment may continue for up to 12
months, and new authorizations may be
issued by VA as needed), and
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–29311 Filed 12–13–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 241 (Monday, December 16, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76061-76063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29311]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900-AO46
Authorization for Non-VA Medical Services
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rulemaking amends
VA's regulations regarding payment by VA for medical services under
VA's statutory authority for non-VA medical care. In the Federal
Register on November 28, 2012, VA proposed to remove an outdated
regulatory limitation on veterans' eligibility to be referred for non-
VA medical care. On the same date, VA also published a companion direct
final rule that would have made the same amendments effective on
January 28, 2013, if no significant adverse comments were received.
Because VA received adverse comments on the direct final rule, VA is
withdrawing it in a companion document in this issue of the Federal
Register. This rulemaking includes VA's responses to comments on the
proposed and direct final rules.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective January 15, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Brown, Chief, Policy Management
Department, Department of Veterans Affairs, Chief Business Office,
Purchased Care, 3773 Cherry Creek North Drive, Suite 450, Denver, CO
80209 at (303) 331-7829. This is not a toll-free number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 28, 2012, VA proposed a rule in
the Federal Register, at 77 FR 70967, to amend its regulations
authorizing non-VA medical care. Under our non-VA medical care
authority in 38 U.S.C. 1703, VA may provide certain hospital care
(inpatient care) and medical services (outpatient care) for eligible
veterans when VA facilities are not capable of providing economical
services due to geographical inaccessibility or are not capable of
providing the services needed. VA proposed to revise its existing
regulation, at 38 CFR 17.52(a)(2)(ii), to
[[Page 76062]]
remove a limitation that barred VA from authorizing non-VA medical
services for certain veterans who had not previously been furnished VA
hospital care. Without this revision, these veterans were eligible for
non-VA medical services under Sec. 17.52(a)(2)(ii) to complete
treatment of a nonservice-connected disability only if they had
received VA hospital care for that disability.
On the same date, VA published a companion direct final rule at 77
FR 70893 that would have made the same amendments as those in the
proposed rule effective on January 28, 2013, if no adverse public
comments were received. The direct final rule and proposed rule each
provided a 30-day comment period that ended on December 28, 2012. VA
received comments on the proposed rule and direct final rule, including
some adverse comments. VA is, therefore, withdrawing the direct final
rule in a companion document in this issue of the Federal Register. VA
addresses comments received on both the direct final and proposed rules
in this action.
This final rule adopts the proposed rule without changes.
We received several comments urging VA to expand eligibility for
non-VA medical care to allow all veterans the option of using the
program for any needed treatment. VA lacks statutory authority to make
this change. VA may provide non-VA medical care under 38 U.S.C. 1703
only in limited circumstances: When VA cannot provide economical
hospital care or medical services because of geographic
inaccessibility, or when VA facilities are not capable of providing the
hospital care or medical services that a veteran needs. See 38 U.S.C.
1703(a). Further, if those conditions are met, VA has authority to
provide non-VA medical care to a veteran only if the veteran meets the
eligibility requirements set forth in section 1703. Thus, VA cannot
make the changes these commenters request because to do so would be
contrary to VA's statutory authority under 38 U.S.C. 1703.
One commenter who recommended that VA allow veterans to choose to
receive care from private providers also stated that ``VA hospitals
should be for emergency care and for those who are having operations
and need weeks or months to recover, such as multi-trauma cases,''
suggesting that all other care should be referred to non-VA providers.
We emphasize that the VA health care system does provide emergency
medical services and hospital care to eligible veterans, including
surgical services and acute inpatient polytrauma rehabilitation, as
recommended by the commenter. By statute, the VA health care system
must also provide ``a complete medical and hospital service for the
medical care and treatment of veterans'' (38 U.S.C. 7301(b)) and
therefore cannot reduce the availability of VA care in the manner
suggested by the commenter. VA makes no changes based on this comment.
One commenter expressed support for this regulation and stated that
veterans receiving non-VA emergency treatment would not need to be
transferred from a non-VA hospital to a VA hospital to complete
treatment. This comment does not accurately characterize the effect of
this rulemaking. To clarify, this action only applies to the provision
of non-VA medical services after the veteran has received VA care and
the non-VA medical services are needed to complete the VA care.
One commenter stated that VA should not ``duplicat[e] medical
services readily available by well qualified providers'' and that
``[m]any veterans are forced by current VA practices to utilize local
medical services, even though the services are in theory available from
the VA at other than a `local' VA facility.'' This comment can be
interpreted in two ways. One interpretation is that some veterans are
forced to pay for their own care from community providers in order to
avoid traveling when their local VA facilities refer them to VA
facilities located in other geographic areas. Another interpretation is
that VA refers veterans to community providers when care would be
better provided at a VA facility. Neither interpretation is within the
scope of this rulemaking. VA therefore does not make any changes to
this rulemaking based on these comments.
The same commenter recommended that veterans' ``expenses in
utilizing [Medicare] should be offset by VA reimbursement.'' We note
that the VA health care system and Medicare are separate programs run
under distinct statutory authorities. VA has no authority to reimburse
Medicare beneficiaries for expenses they incur to obtain medical care
under Medicare in the manner suggested by the commenter (see 42 U.S.C.
1395y(a)(3)). VA does not make any changes based on this comment.
One commenter asked whether this rulemaking would result in
additional administrative burdens for veterans to obtain referrals or
for providers to obtain payments for non-VA medical care. This
rulemaking only removes a limitation; it does not create any new
burdens or procedures. VA's regulations and policies pertaining to how
veterans obtain referrals and how VA processes payments for non-VA
medical care will remain the same. There will be no additional
administrative burden on veterans or non-VA providers as a result of
this rulemaking.
The majority of the comments that VA received on this rulemaking
requested that VA allow hearing-aid specialists to perform diagnostic
hearing evaluations for veterans. We received over one hundred comments
on this issue. Some of the commenters requested to become recognized VA
providers. VA allows only audiologists to perform such evaluations. We
are not aware of any State that licenses hearing-aid specialists to
perform such evaluations. VA will consider these comments internally as
appropriate, but the request is outside the scope of this rulemaking,
so we make no changes based on these comments.
VA received a comment expressing support for the proposed rule, but
expressing concern about a draft request for proposals issued by VA for
the procurement of non-VA medical care surgical services. This
rulemaking affects only eligibility for non-VA medical services, and
not VA's means of procuring such services. This comment, therefore, is
outside of the scope of the regulation, and we make no changes based on
it. VA will consider this comment in its evaluation of the draft
request for proposals as appropriate.
VA received a comment expressing support for the proposed rule, but
asking VA to remove ``a burdensome regulatory requirement that
prescriptions for veterans must be written by a VA-affiliated provider
for the veteran to obtain the prescription at the VA's discounted
price. Instead, the VA should recognize the validity of a community-
based physician's prescription.'' We do not make changes based on this
comment because the issue is outside the scope of this regulation. VA
will consider the recommendation internally as appropriate.
VA received one comment expressing support for the proposed rule
and requesting that physicians certified by osteopathic boards of
medicine be included in all VA activities concerning veterans'
healthcare. This comment is outside the scope of this regulation, but
no change is required for VA to fulfill the request because VA
considers doctors of osteopathic medicine as physicians, and does not
distinguish between physicians based on their types of degrees.
VA received one comment stating ``[v]ote no.'' Since the commenter
did
[[Page 76063]]
not state a reason for disagreeing with this rulemaking, VA does not
make any changes based on this comment.
In addition to the comments described above, VA received several
comments expressing general support for the proposed rulemaking.
Based on the rationale set forth in the proposed rule and in this
document, VA is adopting the provisions of the proposed rule as a final
rule with no changes.
Effect of Rulemaking
Title 38 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as revised by this
final rulemaking, represents VA's implementation of its legal authority
on this subject. Other than future amendments to this regulation or
governing statutes, no contrary guidance or procedures are authorized.
All existing or subsequent VA guidance must be read to conform with
this rulemaking if possible or, if not possible, such guidance is
superseded by this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This final rule contains no provisions constituting a collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3521).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-
612. This final rule directly affects only individuals and will not
directly affect small entities. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b),
this amendment is exempt from the initial and final regulatory
flexibility analysis requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, and other advantages; distributive impacts;
and equity). Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) defines a
``significant regulatory action,'' requiring review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) as ``any regulatory action that is likely
to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
this Executive Order.''
The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this regulatory action have been examined, and it has
been determined not to be a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866. VA's impact analysis can be found as a
supporting document at https://www.regulations.gov, usually within 48
hours after the rulemaking document is published. Additionally, a copy
of the rulemaking and its impact analysis are available on VA's Web
site at https://www1.va.gov/orpm/, by following the link for ``VA
Regulations Published.''
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C.
1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year. This final rule will have no such effect on
State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers and titles for
the programs affected by this document are 64.007, Blind Rehabilitation
Centers; 64.008, Veterans Domiciliary Care; 64.009, Veterans Medical
Care Benefits; 64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care; 64.011, Veterans
Dental Care; 64.012, Veterans Prescription Service; 64.013, Veterans
Prosthetic Appliances; 64.014, Veterans State Domiciliary Care; 64.015,
Veterans State Nursing Home Care; 64.018, Sharing Specialized Medical
Resources; 64.019, Veterans Rehabilitation Alcohol and Drug Dependence;
64.022, Veterans Home Based Primary Care; and 64.024, VA Homeless
Providers Grant and Per Diem Program.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or designee, approved this
document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document
to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as
an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Jose D.
Riojas, Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this
document on November 6, 2013 for publication.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Claims, Day care, Dental health, Drug abuse, Government contracts,
Grant programs--health, Government programs--veterans, Health care,
Health facilities, Health professions, Health records, Homeless, Mental
health programs, Nursing homes, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Veterans.
Dated: December 4, 2013.
Robert C. McFetridge,
Director, Regulation Policy and Management, Office of the General
Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of Veterans
Affairs amends 38 CFR part 17 as follows:
PART 17--MEDICAL
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in specific sections.
0
2. Revise Sec. 17.52(a)(2)(ii) to read as follows:
Sec. 17.52 Hospital care and medical services in non-VA facilities.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) A veteran who has been furnished hospital care, nursing home
care, domiciliary care, or medical services, and requires medical
services to complete treatment incident to such care or services (each
authorization for non-VA treatment needed to complete treatment may
continue for up to 12 months, and new authorizations may be issued by
VA as needed), and
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-29311 Filed 12-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P