Community Residential Care, 1330-1332 [2014-00099]
Download as PDF
1330
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 5 / Wednesday, January 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Item 27. Financial Statements
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Annual and Semi-Annual Reports.
* * *
(2) Graphical Representation of
Holdings. One or more tables, charts, or
graphs depicting the portfolio holdings
of the Fund by reasonably identifiable
categories (e.g., type of security,
industry sector, geographic region,
credit quality, or maturity) showing the
percentage of net asset value or total
investments attributable to each. The
categories and the basis of presentation
(e.g., net asset value or total
investments) should be selected, and the
presentation should be formatted, in a
manner reasonably designed to depict
clearly the types of investments made
by the Fund, given its investment
objectives. If the Fund depicts portfolio
holdings according to credit quality, it
should include a description of how the
credit quality of the holdings were
determined, and if credit ratings, as
defined in section 3(a)(60) of the
Securities Exchange Act [15 U.S.C.
78(c)(a)(60)], assigned by a credit rating
agency, as defined in section 3(a)(61) of
the Securities Exchange Act [15 U.S.C.
78(c)(a)(61)], are used, explain how they
were identified and selected. This
description should be included near, or
as part of, the graphical representation.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Form N–2 (referenced in §§ 239.14
and 274.11a–1) is amended by revising
Instruction 6.a. to Item 24 to read as
follows:
Note: The text of Form N–2 does not, and
these amendments will not, appear in the
Code of Federal Regulations.
FORM N–2
*
*
*
*
*
Item 24. Financial Statements
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
Instructions:
*
*
*
*
*
6. * * *
a. one or more tables, charts, or graphs
depicting the portfolio holdings of the
Fund by reasonably identifiable
categories (e.g., type of security,
industry sector, geographic region,
credit quality, or maturity) showing the
percentage of net asset value or total
investments attributable to each. The
categories and the basis of presentation
(e.g., net asset value or total
investments) should be selected, and the
presentation should be formatted, in a
manner reasonably designed to depict
clearly the types of investments made
by the Fund, given its investment
objectives. If the Fund depicts portfolio
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:56 Jan 07, 2014
Jkt 232001
holdings according to credit quality, it
should include a description of how the
credit quality of the holdings were
determined, and if credit ratings, as
defined in section 3(a)(60) of the
Securities Exchange Act [15 U.S.C.
78(c)(a)(60)], assigned by a credit rating
agency, as defined in section 3(a)(61) of
the Securities Exchange Act [15 U.S.C.
78(c)(a)(61)], are used, explain how they
were identified and selected. This
description should be included near, or
as part of, the graphical representation.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. Form N–3 (referenced in §§ 239.17a
and 274.11b) is amended by revising
Instruction 6.(i) to Item 28(a) to read as
follows:
Note: The text of Form N–3 does not, and
these amendments will not, appear in the
Code of Federal Regulations.
FORM N–3
*
*
*
*
*
Item 28. Financial Statements
(a) * * *
Instructions:
*
*
*
*
*
6. * * *
(i) One or more tables, charts, or
graphs depicting the portfolio holdings
of the Fund by reasonably identifiable
categories (e.g., type of security,
industry sector, geographic region,
credit quality, or maturity) showing the
percentage of net asset value or total
investments attributable to each. The
categories and the basis of presentation
(e.g., net asset value or total
investments) should be selected, and the
presentation should be formatted, in a
manner reasonably designed to depict
clearly the types of investments made
by the Fund, given its investment
objectives. If the Fund depicts portfolio
holdings according to credit quality, it
should include a description of how the
credit quality of the holdings were
determined, and if credit ratings, as
defined in section 3(a)(60) of the
Securities Exchange Act [15 U.S.C.
78(c)(a)(60)], assigned by a credit rating
agency, as defined in section 3(a)(61) of
the Securities Exchange Act [15 U.S.C.
78(c)(a)(61)], are used, explain how they
were identified and selected. This
description should be included near, or
as part of, the graphical representation.
*
*
*
*
*
By the Commission.
Dated: December 27, 2013.
Lynn M. Powalski,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–31425 Filed 1–7–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900–AO62
Community Residential Care
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This rule adopts as final,
without change, an interim final rule
amending the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) regulations concerning
approval of non-VA community
residential care (CRC) facilities to allow
VA to waive such facilities’ compliance
with standards that do not jeopardize
the health or safety of residents. As
amended, the regulation allows VA to
grant a waiver of a CRC standard in
those limited circumstances where the
deficiency cannot be corrected to meet
a standard provided for in VA
regulation. This rulemaking also makes
a certain necessary technical
amendment to correct a reference to the
section addressing requests for a
hearing.
SUMMARY:
Effective Date: This final rule is
effective January 8, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nancy Quest, Director, Home and
Community Based Services (10P4G),
Veterans Health Administration, 810
Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20420, (202) 461–6064. (This is not a
toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In an
interim final rule published in the
Federal Register on May 29, 2013, at 78
FR 32124, VA amended 38 CFR 17.65,
which contains VA’s regulations
governing approvals and provisional
approvals of CRC facilities. The interim
final rule allowed VA to waive one or
more of the standards in 38 CFR 17.63
for the approval of a particular CRC
facility, provided that a VA safety expert
certifies that the deficiency does not
endanger the life or safety of the
residents; the deficiency cannot be
corrected; and granting the waiver is in
the best interests of the veteran in the
facility and VA’s CRC program. The
rulemaking also made a certain
necessary technical amendment to
§ 17.66. The interim final rule was
effective immediately upon publication
and provided a 60-day comment period,
which ended on July 29, 2013. VA
received no public comments and
therefore makes no changes to the
regulation.
Based on the rationale set forth in the
interim final rule, VA is adopting the
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM
08JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 5 / Wednesday, January 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
interim final rule as a final rule with no
changes.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Administrative Procedure Act
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
and (d)(3), the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs concluded that there was good
cause to publish the interim final rule
without prior opportunity for public
comment and to publish the rule with
an immediate effective date. The
Secretary found that it was contrary to
the public interest to delay this rule for
the purpose of soliciting advance public
comment or to have a delayed effective
date. The interim final rule was
necessary to address an immediate need
to provide a mechanism that will allow
VA to grant a waiver to a CRC facility
that cannot obtain full approval because
of a minor deviation from regulatory
standards that cannot be corrected and
does not endanger the lives or safety of
the veteran residents. Although
approval would be rescinded because of
a minor and uncorrectable deviation
from standards unrelated to health or
safety, veterans may be dissuaded from
maintaining their residence in such a
facility. Providing a waiver in that
circumstance will preclude the need to
terminate a CRC facility’s approval
based on an uncorrectable minor
deviation from non-safety related
standards. This eliminates the potential
that resident veterans will needlessly
choose to leave an otherwise healthy,
safe, and suitable living arrangement.
Regulations in place prior to the
effective date of the interim final rule
did not provide for any waiver of
standards. It is in the public interest for
a veteran not to be removed from a
stable living situation based solely on a
minor deviation from standards that
does not threaten life or safety.
To prevent veterans from needlessly
choosing to leave affected CRC facilities
because the facilities are no longer on
the approved list, and in order to ensure
timely implementation of the program
established by this rule, and for the
reasons stated above, the Secretary also
found, in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), good cause for the interim
final rule to be effective on the date of
publication.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:56 Jan 07, 2014
Jkt 232001
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 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501–3521).
Documentation that a VA safety expert
may request from a CRC facility to
support a waiver determination, as
provided under 38 CFR 17.65(d)(1),
would not qualify as ‘‘information’’
under the PRA because collection of this
information would be conducted on an
individual case-by-case basis and would
require individualized information
pertaining to the specific deficiency
identified by the VA safety expert. We
believe that this collection is therefore
exempt from the PRA requirements, as
provided under 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(6)
(excluding from PRA requirements a
‘‘request for facts or opinions addressed
to a single person).’’
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
will have little, if any, economic impact
on a few small entities. VA may waive
a standard under this rulemaking
provided a VA safety expert certifies
that the deficiency does not endanger
the life or safety of the residents, the
deficiency cannot be corrected, and
granting the waiver is in the best
interests of the veteran in the facility
and VA’s CRC program.
In order to reach the above
determinations, the VA safety expert
may request supporting documentation
from the CRC facility. VA believes
supplying this information will
constitute an inconsequential amount of
the operational cost for those CRC
facilities. VA believes that, at most, only
a few CRC facilities would qualify for a
waiver. On this basis, the Secretary
certifies that the adoption of 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. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
605(b), this rulemaking is exempt from
the initial and final regulatory flexibility
analysis requirements of sections 603
and 604.
Executive Order 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1331
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) unless OMB waives such review,
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
1 year. This final rule will have no such
effect on State, local, and tribal
governments, or on the private sector.
E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM
08JAR1
1332
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 5 / Wednesday, January 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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; and
64.022, Veterans Home Based Primary
Care.
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 December 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, Foreign relations, Government
contracts, Grant programs-health,
Government programs-veterans, Health
care, Health facilities, Health
professions, Health records, Homeless,
Medical and dental schools, Medical
devices, Medical research, Mental
health programs, Nursing homes,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Scholarships and
fellowships, Travel and transportation
expenses, Veterans.
Dated: January 3, 2014.
Robert C. McFetridge,
Director, Office of Regulation Policy and
Management, Office of the General Counsel,
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Based on the rationale set forth in the
Federal Register at 78 FR 32124 on May
29, 2013, VA is adopting the interim
final rule as a final rule with no
changes.
[FR Doc. 2014–00099 Filed 1–7–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900–AO51
Removal of Penalty for Breaking
Appointments
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:56 Jan 07, 2014
Jkt 232001
The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) amends its regulations to
remove an outdated regulation that
stated that a veteran who misses two
medical appointments without
providing 24 hours’ notice and a
reasonable excuse is deemed to have
refused VA medical care. VA removes
this penalty because we believe it is
incompatible with regulatory changes
implemented after the regulation was
promulgated, is not in line with current
practice, and is inconsistent with VA’s
patient-centered approach to medical
care.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective February 7, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ethan Kalett, Director, Office of
Regulatory Affairs (10B4), Department
of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20420; (202) 461–
5657. (This is not a toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April
15, 2013, VA published in the Federal
Register (78 FR 22219) a proposed rule
to amend VA regulations by removing
§ 17.100. This regulation stated that a
veteran who misses two medical
appointments without providing 24
hours’ notice and a reasonable excuse is
deemed to have refused VA medical
care and no further treatment will be
provided to that veteran, except in
emergency situations, unless the veteran
agrees to cooperate by keeping future
appointments. We stated that this
penalty is inconsistent with VA’s goal of
providing patient-centered care, may
interfere with continuity and
coordination of care, and could have a
negative impact on the therapeutic
relationship. In addition, refusing to
provide further medical services to
certain veterans, including homeless
veterans and other veterans who lack
reliable telephone access or dependable
transportation to and from scheduled
appointments is counterproductive and
may discourage them from attempting to
access care in the future. Lastly,
providing treatment only in emergent
circumstances does not provide an
adequate safety net for our patients,
especially those with chronic or poorly
controlled medical conditions.
Interested persons were invited to
submit comments to the proposed rule
on or before June 14, 2013, and we
received six comments. All of the
comments were supportive of removing
§ 17.100, and did not suggest changes to
the proposed removal of the rule.
However, two commenters raised issues
that we believe should be addressed.
One commenter expressed support for
removing this regulation, but suggested
a different approach to addressing the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
issue of broken appointments. The
commenter suggested that, after two
consecutive missed appointments, VA
should follow a series of steps to contact
the veteran and to place a limit
(‘‘moratorium’’) on the care available to
the veteran on the particular health
issue.
VA appreciates the commenter’s
input. However, VA has determined that
the appropriate course of action is to
remove the penalty for breaking
appointments. In practice, the problem
of missed appointments has been
adequately addressed through internal
VA processes, as well as by using nonpunitive measures and maintaining an
open channel of communication
between VA clinical/administrative staff
and veterans. The penalty contemplated
by § 17.100 is incompatible with
regulatory changes implemented after
that regulation was published, is not in
line with current practice, and is
inconsistent with VA’s patient-centered
approach to medical care. Even a short
break in a course of treatment can
interfere with continuity and
coordination of care, and the punitive
nature of the regulation could have a
negative impact on the therapeutic
relationship.
Another commenter supported
removing the penalty for breaking
medical appointments, but stated that
the regulation should be removed
because it violates due process
protections. VA disagrees. The
regulation we remove by this final rule
did not terminate a benefit; it merely
attempted to facilitate efficient delivery
of limited health care resources. The
veteran remained enrolled to receive
health care, and could receive treatment
for any emergent condition that may
arise. To schedule a non-emergency
medical appointment, the veteran
merely had to agree to attend the
appointment. In any event, this issue is
moot because we are removing the
penalty.
This commenter also suggested that
VA should employ social workers to be
responsible for tracking and contacting
veterans who habitually miss medical
appointments. VA does use various
methods to follow up with those
veterans in an effort to ensure they
receive necessary medical care. Veterans
are contacted via mail, phone, or
electronic means after a missed
appointment, and are encouraged to
contact VA to reschedule.
We do not make any changes based on
these comments.
Based on the rationale set forth in the
proposed rule and in this final rule, VA
is adopting the provisions of the
E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM
08JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1330-1332]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-00099]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900-AO62
Community Residential Care
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule adopts as final, without change, an interim final
rule amending the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regulations
concerning approval of non-VA community residential care (CRC)
facilities to allow VA to waive such facilities' compliance with
standards that do not jeopardize the health or safety of residents. As
amended, the regulation allows VA to grant a waiver of a CRC standard
in those limited circumstances where the deficiency cannot be corrected
to meet a standard provided for in VA regulation. This rulemaking also
makes a certain necessary technical amendment to correct a reference to
the section addressing requests for a hearing.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective January 8, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Quest, Director, Home and
Community Based Services (10P4G), Veterans Health Administration, 810
Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-6064. (This is not
a toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In an interim final rule published in the
Federal Register on May 29, 2013, at 78 FR 32124, VA amended 38 CFR
17.65, which contains VA's regulations governing approvals and
provisional approvals of CRC facilities. The interim final rule allowed
VA to waive one or more of the standards in 38 CFR 17.63 for the
approval of a particular CRC facility, provided that a VA safety expert
certifies that the deficiency does not endanger the life or safety of
the residents; the deficiency cannot be corrected; and granting the
waiver is in the best interests of the veteran in the facility and VA's
CRC program. The rulemaking also made a certain necessary technical
amendment to Sec. 17.66. The interim final rule was effective
immediately upon publication and provided a 60-day comment period,
which ended on July 29, 2013. VA received no public comments and
therefore makes no changes to the regulation.
Based on the rationale set forth in the interim final rule, VA is
adopting the
[[Page 1331]]
interim final rule as a final rule with no changes.
Administrative Procedure Act
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and (d)(3), the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs concluded that there was good cause to publish the
interim final rule without prior opportunity for public comment and to
publish the rule with an immediate effective date. The Secretary found
that it was contrary to the public interest to delay this rule for the
purpose of soliciting advance public comment or to have a delayed
effective date. The interim final rule was necessary to address an
immediate need to provide a mechanism that will allow VA to grant a
waiver to a CRC facility that cannot obtain full approval because of a
minor deviation from regulatory standards that cannot be corrected and
does not endanger the lives or safety of the veteran residents.
Although approval would be rescinded because of a minor and
uncorrectable deviation from standards unrelated to health or safety,
veterans may be dissuaded from maintaining their residence in such a
facility. Providing a waiver in that circumstance will preclude the
need to terminate a CRC facility's approval based on an uncorrectable
minor deviation from non-safety related standards. This eliminates the
potential that resident veterans will needlessly choose to leave an
otherwise healthy, safe, and suitable living arrangement. Regulations
in place prior to the effective date of the interim final rule did not
provide for any waiver of standards. It is in the public interest for a
veteran not to be removed from a stable living situation based solely
on a minor deviation from standards that does not threaten life or
safety.
To prevent veterans from needlessly choosing to leave affected CRC
facilities because the facilities are no longer on the approved list,
and in order to ensure timely implementation of the program established
by this rule, and for the reasons stated above, the Secretary also
found, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause for the
interim final rule to be effective on the date of publication.
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 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3501-3521). Documentation that a VA safety expert may request from a
CRC facility to support a waiver determination, as provided under 38
CFR 17.65(d)(1), would not qualify as ``information'' under the PRA
because collection of this information would be conducted on an
individual case-by-case basis and would require individualized
information pertaining to the specific deficiency identified by the VA
safety expert. We believe that this collection is therefore exempt from
the PRA requirements, as provided under 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(6) (excluding
from PRA requirements a ``request for facts or opinions addressed to a
single person).''
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 will have little, if any, economic impact on a few
small entities. VA may waive a standard under this rulemaking provided
a VA safety expert certifies that the deficiency does not endanger the
life or safety of the residents, the deficiency cannot be corrected,
and granting the waiver is in the best interests of the veteran in the
facility and VA's CRC program.
In order to reach the above determinations, the VA safety expert
may request supporting documentation from the CRC facility. VA believes
supplying this information will constitute an inconsequential amount of
the operational cost for those CRC facilities. VA believes that, at
most, only a few CRC facilities would qualify for a waiver. On this
basis, the Secretary certifies that the adoption of 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.
Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this rulemaking is exempt from
the initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of
sections 603 and 604.
Executive Order 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) unless OMB waives such review, 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 1 year. This final rule will have no such effect on
State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector.
[[Page 1332]]
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; and 64.022,
Veterans Home Based Primary Care.
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 December 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, Foreign relations,
Government contracts, Grant programs-health, Government programs-
veterans, Health care, Health facilities, Health professions, Health
records, Homeless, Medical and dental schools, Medical devices, Medical
research, Mental health programs, Nursing homes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Scholarships and fellowships, Travel and
transportation expenses, Veterans.
Dated: January 3, 2014.
Robert C. McFetridge,
Director, Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Office of the
General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Based on the rationale set forth in the Federal Register at 78 FR
32124 on May 29, 2013, VA is adopting the interim final rule as a final
rule with no changes.
[FR Doc. 2014-00099 Filed 1-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P