Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 159 / Wednesday, August 18, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 50883 

implications that would have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government; therefore, 

consultation with State and local 

officials is not required. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 199 

Claims, Dental health, Health care, 

Health insurance, Individuals with 

disabilities, Military personnel. 

■ Accordingly, 32 CFR part 199 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 199—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 199 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 10 U.S.C. Chapter 

55. 

■ 2. Section 199.3 is amended by adding 

paragraphs (e)(1)(v) and (e)(1)(vi) to read 

as follows: 

§ 199.3 Eligibility. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(v) A member who receives a sole 

survivorship discharge (as defined in 

section 1174(i) of this title). 

(vi) A member who is separated from 

Active Duty who agrees to become a 

member of the Selected Reserve of the 

Ready Reserve of a reserve component. 

* * * * * 

Dated: August 10, 2010. 

Patricia L. Toppings, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2010–20393 Filed 8–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 199 

[Docket ID: DoD–2008–HA–0123] 

RIN 0720–AB29 

TRICARE; TRICARE Delivery of Health 

Care in Alaska 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, 

Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: TRICARE has recognized the 

unique circumstances existing in Alaska 

which make the provision of medical 

care to TRICARE beneficiaries through 

the TRICARE program operated in the 

other 49 states unrealistic. Recognizing 

these unique conditions and 

circumstances, the Department of 

Defense has conducted a demonstration 

project in the state of Alaska since 

implementation of the TRICARE 

program under which certain exceptions 

have been made for administration of 

the program in Alaska. This rule 

incorporates the waiver of the 

requirement for financial underwriting 

by a TRICARE contractor as a 

permanent change to the administration 

of the TRICARE program in Alaska. This 

rule proposes no change to the 

TRICARE benefit or to those who are 

eligible for it. However, the rule does 

eliminate the financial underwriting of 

health care costs in the state of Alaska 

by a TRICARE contractor. 

DATES: Effective Date: September 17, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTC 

Stephen Oates, TRICARE Policy and 

Operations Directorate, TRICARE 

Management Activity, 5111 Leesburg 

Pike, Suite 810, Falls Church, VA 

22041, telephone (703) 681–0039. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction and Background 

In recognition of the unique 

geographical and environmental 

characteristics of the state of Alaska, the 

Department of Defense has conducted a 

demonstration project which tested the 

viability of implementing the TRICARE 

program differently in Alaska (see 

Federal Register, Vol. 69, No. 96/ 

Tuesday, May 18, 2004/Notices). To 

date that demonstration has supported 

the impracticability and lack of cost 

effectiveness to impose on a TRICARE 

contractor the financial underwriting of 

the delivery of health care resulting 

from costs associated with the TRICARE 

program over which the contractor has 

no control. The demonstration is 

authorized until March 31, 2011. This 

rule will make permanent the waiver of 

the financial underwriting requirement 

by the TRICARE contractor in the 

delivery of health care in Alaska. 

II. Public Comments 

The proposed rule was published in 

the Federal Register (74 FR 62270– 

62271) on November 27, 2009, for a 60- 

day comment period. Two comments 

were submitted and are responded to 

below. 

Comment: Alaska TRICARE managers 

need authorization, as do other states, to 

designate civilian primary care 

managers (PCMs) for care unavailable or 

too distant for the members who are in 

TRICARE Prime. 

Response: We agree that allowing 

TRICARE managers the ability to 

designate civilian primary care 

managers (PCMs) would improve the 

access to care for eligible beneficiaries. 

Policies are currently being reviewed to 

assess the feasibility of incorporating 

such practices without adversely 

affecting the local community. 

Comment: Certified Nurse Midwives 

and state-licensed direct-entry 

midwives are underutilized alternatives 

to physician-led care for pregnant 

women. Also, TRICARE’s authorized 

providers should be expanded to 

include state-licensed midwives. 

Response: We understand the limited 

choices available to beneficiaries in the 

state of Alaska; however, the ultimate 

decision remains with the beneficiary 

on provider selection. In order for a 

Certified Nurse Midwife to become a 

TRICARE-authorized provider, he/she 

must be licensed, when required, by a 

local licensing agency and certified by 

the American College of Nurse 

Midwives. 

II. Regulatory Procedures 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ 

Section 801 of title 5, United States 

Code (U.S.C.) and Executive Order 

(E.O.) 12866 require certain regulatory 

assessments and procedures for any 

major rule or significant regulatory 

action, defined as one that would result 

in an annual effect of $100 million or 

more on the national economy or which 

would have other substantial impacts. It 

has been certified that this rule is not an 

economically significant rule, however, 

it is a regulatory action which has been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget as required under the 

provisions of E.O. 12866. 

Section 202, Public Law, 104–4, 

‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’ 

It has been certified that this rule does 

not contain a Federal mandate that may 

result in the expenditure by State, local 

and tribal governments, in aggregate, or 

by the private sector, of $100 million or 

more in any one year. 

Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory 

Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. 601) 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

requires each Federal agency prepare 

and make available for public comment, 

a regulatory flexibility analysis when 

the agency issues a regulation which 

would have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This rule is not an economically 

significant regulatory action and will 

not have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities for 

purposes of the RFA. Thus, this 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
50884 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 159 / Wednesday, August 18, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

proposed rule is not subject to any of 

these requirements. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3511) 

This rule will not impose additional 

information collection requirements on 

the public. 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ 

We have examined the impact of the 

rule under Executive Order 13132, and 

it does not have policies that have 

federalism implications that would have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, 

consultation with State and local 

officials is not required. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 199 

Claims, Dental health, Health care, 

Health insurance, Individuals with 

disabilities, Military personnel. 

■ Accordingly, 32 CFR part 199 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 199—CIVILIAN HEALTH AND 

MEDICAL PROGRAM OF THE 

UNIFORMED SERVICES (CHAMPUS) 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 199 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 10 U.S.C. chapter 

55. 

■ 2. Section 199.17 is amended by 

revising the second sentence of 

paragraph (a)(3), redesignating 

paragraph (v) as paragraph (w), and by 

adding a new paragraph (v) to read as 

follows: 

§ 199.17 TRICARE program 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(3) * * * Its geographical 

applicability is to all 50 states (except as 

modified for the state of Alaska under 

paragraph (v) of this section) and the 

District of Columbia. * * * 

* * * * * 

(v) Administration of the TRICARE 

program in the state of Alaska. In view 

of the unique geographical and 

environmental characteristics impacting 

the delivery of health care in the state 

of Alaska, administration of the 

TRICARE program in the state of Alaska 

will not include financial underwriting 

of the delivery of health care by a 

TRICARE contractor. All other 

provisions of this section shall apply to 

administration of the TRICARE program 

in the state of Alaska as they apply to 

the other 49 states and the District of 

Columbia. 

* * * * * 

Dated: August 10, 2010. 

Patricia L. Toppings, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2010–20391 Filed 8–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Parts 3 and 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–0351] 

RIN 1625–ZA25 

Navigation and Navigable Waters; 

Technical, Organizational, and 

Conforming Amendments, Sector 

Columbia River; Correction 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard published in 

the Federal Register of August 11, 2010, 

a document concerning non-substantive 

changes to Title 33 Parts 3 and 165 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations. That 

publication contained several errors 

regarding the name of the Sector that 

was being disestablished and one being 

established in its place. In addition, 

there was an error in amendatory 

instruction 5. This document corrects 

these errors. 

DATES: This correction is effective 

August 18, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

e-mail Lt. Matthew Jones, Coast Guard; 

telephone 206–220–7110, e-mail 

Matthew.m.jones@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing the docket, call 

Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR doc 

2010–19754 appearing on page 48564 in 

the issue of Wednesday, August 11, 

2010, the following corrections are 

made: 

1. In the document heading on page 

48564, correct the subject heading to 

read ‘‘Navigation and Navigable Waters; 

Technical, Organizational, and 

Conforming Amendments, Sector 

Columbia River.’’ 

2. On page 48564, in the first column, 

revise the summary section to read as 

follows: 

‘‘This rule makes non-substantive 

changes throughout our regulations. The 

purpose of this rule is to make 

conforming amendments and technical 

corrections to reflect the combination 

and renaming of Sector Portland and 

Group/Air Station Astoria to Sector 

Columbia River as part of the Coast 

Guard reorganization.’’ 

3. On page 48564, in the second 

column, revise the discussion of rule 

section to read as follows: 

‘‘This rule revises 33 CFR parts 3 and 

165 to reflect changes in Coast Guard 

internal organizational structure. Sector 

Portland and Group/Air Station Astoria 

have been disestablished and Sector 

Columbia River has been established in 

their place. The new Sector begins 

operations on August 23, 2010. This 

rule revises 33 CFR parts 3 and 165 to 

reflect the Sector Columbia River and 

Captain of the Port Zone name change 

in current regulations. This rule is a 

technical revision reflecting changes in 

agency procedure and organization, and 

does not indicate new authorities nor 

create any substantive requirements.’’ 

4. On page 48565, in the third 

column, revise amendatory instruction 

number 5 to read as follows: 

‘‘In § 165.1312(b), remove the phrase 

‘‘Coast Guard Captain of the Port, 

Portland’’ and add, in its place, the 

phrase ‘‘Captain of the Port Columbia 

River’’.’’ 

Dated: August 13, 2010. 

Steve Venckus, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law, United States Coast 

Guard. 

[FR Doc. 2010–20509 Filed 8–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0601 and EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2008–0602; FRL–8836–3] 

2-(2’-hydroxy-3’, 5’-di-tert-amylphenyl) 

benzotriazole and Phenol, 2-(2Hbenzotriazole-2-yl)-6-dodecyl-4-methyl; 

Exemption from the Requirement of a 

Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of 2-(2’-hydroxy3’, 5’-di-tert-amylphenyl) benzotriazole 

(CAS Reg. No. 25973–55–1) and Phenol, 

2-(2H-benzotriazole-2-yl)-6-dodecyl-4- 

methyl; (CAS Reg. No. 23328–53–2) 

when used as a ultraviolet (UV) 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES