896 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

The staff is also issuing for public 

comment a draft regulatory analysis 

(ADAMS Accession No. ML23277A279). 

The staff developed a regulatory 

analysis to assess the value of issuing or 

revising a regulatory guide as well as 

alternative courses of action. 

As noted in the Federal Register on 

December 9, 2022 (87 FR 75671), this 

document is being published in the 

‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of the Federal 

Register to comply with publication 

requirements under 1 CFR chapter I. 

III. Backfitting, Forward Fitting, and 

Issue Finality 

Issuance of DG–1421, if finalized, 

would not constitute backfitting as 

defined in 10 CFR 50.109, ‘‘Backfitting,’’ 

and as described in NRC Management 

Directive (MD) 8.4, ‘‘Management of 

Backfitting, Forward Fitting, Issue 

Finality, and Information Requests’’; 

affect the issue finality of an approval 

issued under 10 CFR part 52, ‘‘Licenses, 

Certifications, and Approvals for 

Nuclear Power Plants’’; or constitute 

forward fitting as that term is defined 

and described in MD 8.4, because, as 

explained in this DG, licensees would 

not be required to comply with the 

positions set forth in this DG. 

IV. Submitting Suggestions for 

Improvement of Regulatory Guides 

A member of the public may, at any 

time, submit suggestions to the NRC for 

improvement of existing RGs or for the 

development of new RGs. Suggestions 

can be submitted on the NRC’s public 

website at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/reg-guides/ 

contactus.html. Suggestions will be 

considered in future updates and 

enhancements to the ‘‘Regulatory 

Guide’’ series. 

Dated: January 3, 2024. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Meraj Rahimi, 

Chief, Regulatory Guide and Programs 

Management Branch, Division of Engineering, 

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. 

[FR Doc. 2024–00145 Filed 1–5–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 131 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2023–0222; FRL 10760–01– 

OW] 

RIN 2040–AG30 

Water Quality Standards To Protect 

Aquatic Life in the Delaware River 

Correction 

In proposed rule document 2023– 

27758, appearing on pages 88315–88336 

in the issue of Thursday, December 21, 

2023, make the following correction: 

On page 88326, in the table titled 

‘‘Table 7: Alternative 1: Dissolved 

Oxygen Criteria Expressed as 

Concentration (mg/L)’’, the table is 

corrected to appear as set forth below: 

TABLE 7—ALTERNATIVE 1: DISSOLVED OXYGEN CRITERIA EXPRESSED AS CONCENTRATION

[mg/L] 

Season 

Water 

temperature 

(°C) 

Magnitude 

(mg/L) Duration Exceedance frequency 

Spawning and Larval Development (March 

1–June 30).

* 23.3 (14.7) * 5.6 (6.7) Daily Average ........................ 10% (12 Days Cumulative). 

Juvenile Development (July 1–October 31) ... + N/A 5.4 Daily Average ........................ 10% (12 Days Cumulative). + N/A 6.1 Daily Average ........................ 50% (61 Days Cumulative). 

Overwintering (November 1–February 28/29) * 12.4 (5.6) * 7.0 (8.3) Daily Average ........................ 10% (12 Days Cumulative). 

*The 90th percentile of seasonal water temperature and corresponding criterion is used for the main estimate, while the average water temperature and corresponding criterion is shown in parentheses. +Water temperature is not applicable during the Juvenile Development season because the criteria magnitudes are derived from the EPA’s Atlantic Sturgeon cohort model, described in section IV.C.1 of this preamble. 

[FR Doc. C1–2023–27758 Filed 1–5–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 0099–10–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Indian Health Service 

[Docket No.: IHS–FRDOC–0001] 

42 CFR Part 136 

RIN 0917–AA24 

Removal of Outdated Regulations 

AGENCY: Indian Health Service, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services. 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Indian Health Service 

(IHS) of the Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS or ‘‘the 

Department’’) is issuing this Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 

proposing the removal of regulations 

appearing in the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR). These outdated 

regulations do not align with the current 

statutory text. 

DATES: Comments due on or before 

March 8, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

to this proposed rule, identified by RIN 

0917–AA24 by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal. You 

may submit electronic comments at 

https://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for the Docket ID number 

IHS–FRDOC–0001. Follow the 

instructions https://

www.regulations.gov online for 

submitting comments through this 

method. 

• Regular, Express, or Overnight Mail: 

You may mail comments to Indian 

Health Service, Joshuah Marshall, 

Senior Advisor to the Director, Indian 

Health Service, 5600 Fishers Lane, 

Rockville, MD 20857, email: 

joshuah.marshall@ihs.gov. 

All comments received by the 

methods and due date specified above 

will be posted without change to 

content to https://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided about the commenter, and 

such posting may occur before or after 

the closing of the comment period. 

Comments that make threats to 

individuals or institutions or suggest 

that the individual will take harmful 

actions will not be posted. 

Docket: For complete access to 

background documents, posted 

comments, and the plain-language 

summary of the proposed rule of not 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2024 / Proposed Rules 897 

1Final Rule, Provision of Abortion Services by the 

Indian Health Service, 47 FR 4016 (Jan. 27, 1982). 

2Continuing Appropriations for FY 1981, Public 

Law 96–369 (1980); Continuing Appropriations Act 

for FY 1982, Public Law 97–92 (1981). 

3Final Rule, Provision of Abortion Services by the 

Indian Health Service, 47 FR 4016 (Jan. 27, 1982). 

4 Departments of Labor, Health and Human 

Services, and Education, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act, 1994, Public Law 103–112, 

509, 107 Stat. 1082, 1113 (1993). 5 Departments of Labor, Health and Human 

Services, and Education, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act, 1998, Public Law 105–78, 

509(b), 111 Stat. 1467, 1516 (1997). 6 Departments of Labor, Health and Human 

Services, and Education, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act, 2023, Public Law 117–328, 

506–507, 136 Stat. 4459, 4908 (2022); Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 2024 and Other Extensions 

Act, Public Law 118–15 (2023). 7 Indian Health Service Circular No. 22–15, Use 

of Indian Health Service Funds for Abortions (Jun. 

30, 2022), https://www.ihs.gov/ihm/circulars/2022/ 

use-of-indian-health-service-funds-for-abortions/. 

8The regulations also speak to recordkeeping 

requirements and confidentiality of information. 

However, these provisions are unnecessary to 

maintain, because recordkeeping and 

confidentiality of information are independently 

required by other laws and regulations that will 

remain in effect. See, e.g., 45 CFR parts 160, 164 

(Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable 

Health Information (The Privacy Rule)). 

more than 100 words in length required 

by the Providing Accountability 

Through Transparency Act of 2023, go 

to https://www.regulations.gov and 

search for Docket ID number IHS– 

FRDOC–0001. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joshuah Marshall, Senior Advisor to the 

Director, Indian Health Service, 5600 

Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 

email: joshuah.marshall@ihs.gov, 

phone: 301–443–7252. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On January 27, 1982, IHS published 

regulations imposing restrictions on use 

of Federal funding for certain abortions, 

currently codified at 42 CFR 136.51– 

.57.1 These regulations implementing 

IHS program authority pursuant to 25 

U.S.C. 13 and 42 U.S.C. 2001 allowed 

the use of IHS funds for abortions only 

when a physician certified that ‘‘the life 

of the mother would be endangered if 

the fetus were carried to term.’’ This 

restriction was to be consistent with a 

provision in the annual appropriations 

legislation for the Departments of Labor, 

Health and Human Services, and 

Education, sometimes referred to as the 

‘‘Hyde Amendment,’’ that restricted the 

use of Federal funds for certain 

abortions, which did not automatically 

apply to IHS funding.2 The purpose of 

these IHS regulations was specifically 

‘‘to conform IHS practice to that of the 

rest of the Department [of Health and 

Human Services] in accordance with the 

applicable congressional guidelines.’’ 3

In 1988, Congress enacted 25 U.S.C. 

1676, explicitly extending any 

limitations on the use of funds included 

in HHS appropriations laws with 

respect to the performance of abortions 

to apply to funds appropriated to IHS. 

As such, IHS became subject to the 

Hyde Amendment as included in 

annual appropriations legislation. 

Since the IHS promulgated these 

regulations in 1982, Congress has 

repeatedly revised annual restrictions 

related to the use of Federal funds for 

certain abortions. In fiscal year 1994, for 

instance, Congress revised the Hyde 

Amendment to include additional 

exceptions to the general prohibition on 

the use of Federal funds for abortions, 

including in instances in which a 

pregnancy is the result of an act of rape 

or incest.4 Similarly, in fiscal year 1998, 

Congress also altered the standards for 

when the ‘‘life of the mother’’ may be 

considered an exception.5 The Hyde 

Amendment currently provides that no 

covered funds ‘‘shall be expended for 

any abortion’’ or ‘‘for health benefits 

coverage that includes coverage of 

abortion,’’ except ‘‘if the pregnancy is 

the result of an act of rape or incest; or 

. . . in the case where a woman suffers 

from a physical disorder, physical 

injury, or physical illness, including a 

life-endangering physical condition 

caused by or arising from the pregnancy 

itself, that would, as certified by a 

physician, place the woman in danger of 

death unless an abortion is 

performed.’’ 6

The current IHS regulation does not 

align with the current text of the Hyde 

Amendment or with 25 U.S.C. 1676. 

The IHS has complied with, and will 

continue to comply with, the statutory 

exceptions and has clarified its 

compliance with the statutory 

limitations through policy directives,7

and now seeks to remove these outdated 

regulations in their entirety.8 Doing so 

will eliminate any potential confusion 

regarding the legal effect of these 

outdated regulations and will also 

achieve the goal of aligning IHS 

guidelines with the applicable 

Congressional guidelines governing 

HHS. These regulations are no longer 

necessary to achieve that objective, 

given Congress’s enactment of 25 U.S.C. 

1676, which independently aligns 

relevant restrictions applicable to the 

IHS and HHS. At this time, the IHS is 

not proposing any further changes to 

these regulations and is not proposing to 

amend the regulations to reflect the 

standard set out in the current Hyde 

Amendment. Regulations on this subject 

are not necessary to implement the 

IHS’s authority. Nor are they necessary 

to comply with statutory directives. 

Moreover, amending the regulations to 

reflect the current Hyde Amendment 

could cause additional confusion in the 

future if Congress changes the annual 

appropriations language, as it has in the 

past. 

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 

14094 

Executive Order 12866, as amended 

by Executive Order 14094, and 

Executive Order 13563 direct agencies 

to assess all costs and benefits of 

available regulatory alternatives. Section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as 

amended by Executive Order 14094, 

defines a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

as any regulatory action that is likely to 

result in a rule that may: (1) have an 

annual effect on the economy of $200 

million or more (adjusted every 3 years 

by the Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) for changes in gross domestic 

product); 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, territorial, 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 legal or 

policy issues for which centralized 

review would meaningfully further the 

President’s priorities or the principles 

set forth in the Executive Order, as 

specifically authorized in a timely 

manner by the Administrator of OIRA in 

each case. OIRA has determined that 

this proposed rule is a significant 

regulatory action as defined by 

Executive Order 12866 Section 3(f). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This action will not have a significant 

economic impact on Indian health 

programs. Therefore, the regulatory 

flexibility analysis provided for under 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act is not 

required. 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

establishes certain requirements that an 

agency must meet when it promulgates 

a rule that imposes substantial direct 

requirement costs on State and local 

governments or has federalism 

implications. This proposed rule would 

simply remove the existing, outdated 

regulations. HHS has determined that 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
898 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

this proposed rule would not impose 

such costs or have any federalism 

implications. 

Executive Order 13175 

This rule does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

Tribes under Executive Order 13175, 

because it only removes outdated 

regulations that do not align with the 

current statutory text of the Hyde 

Amendment or with 25 U.S.C. 1676. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

HHS had determined that this 

proposed rule would not have a 

significant impact on the environment. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not affect any 

information collections. 

List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 136 

Employment, Government 

procurement, Health care, Health 

facilities, Indians, Penalties, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Department of Health and 

Human Services proposes to amend 42 

CFR part 136 by removing Subpart F as 

follows: 

PART 136—INDIAN HEALTH 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 136 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 25 U.S.C. 13; sec. 3, 68 Stat. 674 

(42 U.S.C., 2001, 2003); Sec. 1, 42 Stat. 208 

(25 U.S.C. 13); 42 U.S.C. 2001, unless 

otherwise noted. 

Subpart F—[Removed and Reserved] 

■ 2. Remove and reserve Subpart F, 

consisting of §§ 136.51 through 136.57. 

Dated: December 28, 2023. 

Xavier Becerra, 

Secretary, Department of Health and Human 

Services. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28948 Filed 1–5–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4166–14–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1