### 35141 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules

12. What methodologies or approaches should FCA consider to more explicitly incorporate a derivatives counterparty exposure charge into the RBCST?

13. What is the best manner of evaluating minimum capital requirements on derivative counterparty exposures in the RBCST and should a pre-processing model be constructed ( i.e., a sub-model used to derive inputs into the RBCST) to represent this risk— both in terms of missed individual contractual cash flows as well the replacement cost on defaulted derivatives? If so, how should replacement costs be estimated?

14. Should Farmer Mac be required to include strategies in its marketing plans that address how its secondary market programs and products will be offered to all qualified borrowers, including:

(a) Minorities, the disabled, and

women;

(b) Young, beginning, small, and family farms and cooperatives; or

(c) Non-traditional agricultural producers, such as local food systems, organic or specialty crop farmers and the lenders who serve them? Why or why not?

15. Should Farmer Mac’s marketing plans set quantitative goals to increase purchases of, or commitments to purchase, loans to young, beginning, small, and family farms, and those owned or operated by minorities, the disabled, and women? If so, what would be the best method to apply such goals to rural utility cooperatives ( e.g., minority-managed cooperatives or cooperatives that serve predominantly minority residential customers or minority-owned commercial customers)?

16. To what extent should FCA regulations require Farmer Mac to develop a human capital plan as part of its strategic and operational business plan to foster diversity in its workforce and succession planning?

Dated: June 10, 2011. Mary Alice Donner, Acting Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.
[FR Doc. 2011–14985 Filed 6–15–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6705–01–P**

**COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION** 

**17 CFR Parts 22 and 190**

**RIN Number 3038–AC99**

**Protection of Cleared Swaps Customer Contracts and Collateral; Conforming**  **Amendments to the Commodity Broker Bankruptcy Provisions; Correction** 

**AGENCY :**  Commodity Futures Trading Commission. **ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking; Correction.

**SUMMARY :**  This document corrects the formatting of text and charts published in the Federal Register of June 09, 2011 (76 FR 33818), regarding Protection of Cleared Swaps Customer Contracts and Collateral; Conforming Amendments to the Commodity Broker Bankruptcy Provisions.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Robert Wasserman, 202–418–5092 or M. Laura Astrada, 202–418–7622.

Correction

In proposed rule document 2011– 10737, in the issue of Thursday, June 09, 2011, on page 33864, in the last column, the text which begins ‘‘1. Sufficient Funds to Meet Non-XM and XM Customer Claims:’’ through to the end of the chart on page 33877 should be replaced with the following:

**BILLING CODE–P**


### 35142 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35143 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35144 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35145 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35146 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35147 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35148 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35149 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35150 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35151 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35152 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35153 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35154 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35155 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35156 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35157 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35158 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35159 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35160 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35161 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules


### 35162 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 10, 2011 by the Commission. David A. Stawick, Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011–14907 Filed 6–15–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE–C**

**DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS** 

**38 CFR Part 17**

**RIN 2900–AN51**

**Service Dogs**

**AGENCY :**  Department of Veterans Affairs.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its regulations concerning veterans in need of service dogs. Under current regulations, VA provides benefits to veterans with guide dogs, and this rulemaking would broaden and clarify those benefits. This rulemaking would also implement new benefits related to service dogs.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received by VA on or before August 15, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  Written comments may be submitted through http:// www.regulations.gov; by mail or handdelivery to the Director, Regulations Management (02REG), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; or by fax to (202) 273–9026. Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900– AN51—Service Dogs.’’ Copies of comments received will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Room 1063B, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202) 461–4902 for an appointment. (This is not a toll-free number.) In addition, during the comment period, comments may be viewed online through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at h ttp:// www.Regulations.gov.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Neal Eckrich, Office of Patient Care Services (113), Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461–1804. (This is not a toll-free number.)

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 1714(b) and (c), VA may provide to veterans enrolled under 38 U.S.C. 1705 guide dogs trained for the aid of people who are blind and service dogs trained for the aid of the hearing impaired or persons with a spinal cord injury or dysfunction or other chronic impairment that substantially limits mobility. Under section 1714(d), VA is also authorized to provide certain travel expenses related to the provision of such dogs. In 1961, VA promulgated 38 CFR 17.118(a) (recodified as current 38 CFR 17.154(a) in 1996) restating the statutory language, which at that time limited VA’s authority to the provision of guide dogs for blind veterans. Under both the statutory and regulatory language VA may provide or furnish a guide dog to a veteran but is not required to do so. VA interpreted ‘‘provide’’ in section 1714 and ‘‘furnished’’ in § 17.154(a) to mean that VA need not actually purchase or acquire dogs for eligible veterans if there is an appropriate alternative. (We also note that nothing in 38 U.S.C. 1714 requires VA to provide a dog to a disabled veteran—the statutory authority is that we ‘‘may’’ do so). Accordingly, it has long been VA’s policy to apply current § 17.154(a) by recognizing guide dogs that are obtained by the veteran from private (usually non-profit) organizations dedicated to training guide dogs. In this manner, we can rely on the professional expertise of these organizations without having to house the animals and hire trainers. Currently, VA regulations recognize only guide dogs and not service dogs. To assist the veteran, VA provides financial assistance for veterinary care, and provides hardware required by the dog at no cost to the veteran. The provision of travel benefits is authorized by current § 17.154(a), and the provision of hardware is authorized by current § 17.154(b). This proposed rule would authorize VA to provide benefits for