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
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.