Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 119 / Thursday, June 24, 2021 / Proposed Rules 33157 

ozone NAAQS for the New Jersey and 

New York portion of the NY-NJ-CT area. 

The EPA is not taking action on the 

other elements of the State submittals. 

V. Proposed Action 

The EPA has evaluated the 

information provided by New Jersey and 

New York and has considered all other 

information it deems relevant to a 

demonstration of attainment of the 1997 

8-hour ozone standard and the 

continued attainment of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standard based on the modeling, 

the quality assured and certified 

monitoring data, and the 

implementation of the more stringent 

2008 8-hour ozone standard. The EPA is 

therefore proposing to approve New 

Jersey’s and New York’s attainment 

demonstrations for the states’ respective 

portions of the NY-NJ-CT area for the 

1997 ozone NAAQS. This proposed 

rulemaking is intended to address the 

EPA’s obligations to act on the 1997 8- 

hour standard attainment demonstration 

portions of the New Jersey January 2, 

2018 submittal and the New York 

November 13, 2017 submittal 

addressing the NY-NJ-CT nonattainment 

area. 

The EPA is soliciting public 

comments on the issues discussed in 

this proposal. Any timely comment 

submitted will be considered before the 

EPA takes final action. Interested parties 

may participate in the Federal 

rulemaking procedure by submitting 

written comments as discussed in the 

ADDRESSES section of this rulemaking. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rulemaking 

action, pertaining to New York’s and 

New Jersey’s 1997 8-hour ozone 

attainment demonstration submissions 

is not approved to apply on any Indian 

reservation land or in any other area 

where EPA or an Indian tribe has 

demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen Dioxide, 

Intergovernmental Relations, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Particulate matter, 

Volatile Organic Compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: June 8, 2021. 

Walter Mugdan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2021–13401 Filed 6–23–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Parts 412, 413, 425, 455, and 

495 

[CMS–1752–CN] 

RIN 0938–AU44 

Medicare Program; Hospital Inpatient 

Prospective Payment Systems for 

Acute Care Hospitals and the LongTerm Care Hospital Prospective 

Payment System and Proposed Policy 

Changes and Fiscal Year 2022 Rates; 

Quality Programs and Medicare 

Promoting Interoperability Program 

Requirements for Eligible Hospitals 

and Critical Access Hospitals; 

Proposed Changes to Medicaid 

Provider Enrollment; and Proposed 

Changes to the Medicare Shared 

Savings Program; Correction 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services (CMS), Department 

of Health and Human Services (HHS). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects 

technical and typographical errors in 

the proposed rule that appeared in the 

May 10, 2021 Federal Register titled 

‘‘Medicare Program; Hospital Inpatient 

Prospective Payment Systems for Acute 

Care Hospitals and the Long Term Care 

Hospital Prospective Payment System 

and Proposed Policy Changes and Fiscal 

Year 2022 Rates; Quality Programs and 

Medicare Promoting Interoperability 

Program Requirements for Eligible 

Hospitals and Critical Access Hospitals; 

Proposed Changes to Medicaid Provider 

Enrollment; and Proposed Changes to 

the Medicare Shared Savings Program.’’ 

DATES: June 24, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Katrina Hoadley, katrina.hoadley@

cms.hhs.gov, Hospital Inpatient Quality 

Reporting Program. 

Julia Venanzi, julia.venanzi@

cms.hhs.gov, Hospital Inpatient Quality 

Reporting and Hospital Value-Based 

Purchasing Programs—Administration 

Issues. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

In FR Doc. 2021–08888 of May 10, 

2021 (86 FR 25070), there were a 

number of technical and typographical 

errors that are identified and corrected 

in this correcting document. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
33158 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 119 / Thursday, June 24, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

II. Summary of Errors 

On pages, 25473, 25475, 25484, and 

25588 we made typographical and 

technical errors in footnotes and 

references to statutory citations and 

other sections of the proposed rule. 

On page 25471, in our discussion of 

the Hospital Value-based Purchasing 

(VBP) Program, we made errors in 

numbering the list of proposed Measure 

Suppression Factors. 

On pages 25489, 25491, and 25492, in 

our discussion of the Hospital VBP 

Program, we made errors in the 

achievement thresholds and 

benchmarks for the clinical outcomes 

domain performance standards that 

appear in the three tables. 

III. Correction of Errors 

In FR Doc. 2021–08888 of May 10, 

2021 (86 FR 25070), make the following 

corrections: 

■ 1. On page 25471, second column, 

■ a. First partial paragraph, lines 6 and 

7, the sentence ‘‘The proposed Measure 

Suppression Factors are:’’ is corrected to 

read ‘‘The proposed measure 

suppression factors are as follows:’’. 

■ b. First through fifth full paragraphs, 

beginning with the phrase ‘‘5. 

Significant deviation’’ and ending with 

the phrase ‘‘(iii) patient case volumes or 

facility-level case mix.’’ are corrected to 

read as 

‘‘• Significant deviation in national 

performance on the measure during the 

PHE for COVID–19, which could be 

significantly better or significantly 

worse compared to historical 

performance during the immediately 

preceding program years. 

• Clinical proximity of the measure’s 

focus to the relevant disease, pathogen, 

or health impacts of the PHE for 

COVID–19. 

• Rapid or unprecedented changes 

in— 

++ Clinical guidelines, care delivery 

or practice, treatments, drugs, or related 

protocols, or equipment or diagnostic 

tools or materials; or 

++ The generally accepted scientific 

understanding of the nature or 

biological pathway of the disease or 

pathogen, particularly for a novel 

disease or pathogen of unknown origin. 

• Significant national shortages or 

rapid or unprecedented changes in— 

++ Healthcare personnel; 

++ Medical supplies, equipment, or 

diagnostic tools or materials; or 

++ Patient case volumes or facilitylevel case mix.’’ 

■ 2. On page 25473, third column, first 

full paragraph, line 2, the phrase 

‘‘section XX.H.1’’, is corrected to read 

‘‘section V.H.1.’’ 

■ 3. On page 25475, third column, 

following the last paragraph, the column 

is corrected by adding footnote text 

(footnote 957) to read as follows: 

‘‘957Zheng, Jun. SARS–CoV–2: an 

Emerging Coronavirus that Causes a Global 

Threat. Int J Biol Sci. 2020; 16(10): 1678– 

1685. Published online 2020 Mar 15. doi: 

10.7150/ijbs.45053.’’ 

■ 4. On page 25484, lower two-thirds of 

the page, the table titled Table V.H.–6: 

Previously Adopted Baseline and 

Performance Periods for the FY 2023 

Program Year, the last table note, first 

line, the reference ‘‘section XX.X.3.c.’’ is 

corrected to read ‘‘section V.H.3.c.’’. 

■ 5. On page 25489, middle of the page, 

the table titled ‘‘Table V.H–11: 

Previously Established and Estimated 

Performance Standards for the FY 2024 

Program Year’’, the entries for the 

clinical outcomes domain’s 

achievement thresholds and 

benchmarks are corrected to read as 

follows: 

TABLE V.H–11—PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED AND ESTIMATED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR THE FY 2024 PROGRAM

YEAR

Measure short name Achievement 

threshold Benchmark 

Clinical Outcomes Domain 

MORT–30–AMI # ..................................................................................................................................................... 0.869247 0.887868 

MORT–30–HF # ....................................................................................................................................................... 0.882308 0.907733 

MORT–30–PN (updated cohort) # ........................................................................................................................... 0.840281 0.872976 

MORT–30–COPD # ................................................................................................................................................. 0.916491 0.934002 

MORT–30–CABG # .................................................................................................................................................. 0.969499 0.980319 

COMP–HIP–KNEE * # .............................................................................................................................................. 0.025396 0.018159 

•Per our proposal in section V.H.4.b. of the preamble of this proposed rule, the performance standards displayed in this table for the Safety 

domain measures were calculated using CY 2019 data. 

* Lower values represent better performance. 

#Previously established performance standards. 

■ 6. On page 25491, top half of the page, 

the table titled ‘‘Table V.H–13: 

Previously Established Performance 

Standards for the FY 2025 Program 

Year’’, the entries for the clinical 

outcomes domain’s achievement 

thresholds and benchmarks are 

corrected to read as follows: 

TABLE V.H–13—PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR THE FY 2025 PROGRAM YEAR

Measure short name Achievement 

threshold Benchmark 

Clinical Outcomes Domain 

MORT–30–AMI ........................................................................................................................................................ 0.872624 0.889994 

MORT–30–HF .......................................................................................................................................................... 0.883990 0.910344 

MORT–30–PN (updated cohort) .............................................................................................................................. 0.841475 0.874425 

MORT–30–COPD .................................................................................................................................................... 0.915127 0.932236 

MORT–30–CABG .................................................................................................................................................... 0.970100 0.979775 

COMP–HIP–KNEE * ................................................................................................................................................ 0.025332 0.017946 

* Lower values represent better performance. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 119 / Thursday, June 24, 2021 / Proposed Rules 33159 

■ 7. On page 25492, top half of the page, 

the table titled ‘‘Table V.H–14: 

Previously Established Performance 

Standards for the FY 2026 Program 

Year’’, the entries for the clinical 

outcomes domain’s achievement 

thresholds and benchmarks are 

corrected to read as follows: 

TABLE V.H–14—PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR THE FY 2026 PROGRAM YEAR

Measure short name Achievement 

threshold Benchmark 

Clinical Outcomes Domain 

MORT–30–AMI ........................................................................................................................................................ 0.874426 0.890687 

MORT–30–HF .......................................................................................................................................................... 0.885949 0.912874 

MORT–30–PN (updated cohort) .............................................................................................................................. 0.843369 0.877097 

MORT–30–COPD .................................................................................................................................................... 0.914691 0.932157 

MORT–30–CABG .................................................................................................................................................... 0.970568 0.980473 

COMP–HIP–KNEE * ................................................................................................................................................ 0.024019 0.016873 

* Lower values represent better performance. 

■ 8. On page 25588, second column, 

footnote paragraph (footnote 1232), lines 

3 through 5, the phrase ‘‘2018: https:// 

www.arthritis.org/Documents/Sections/ 

About-Arthritis/arthritis-facts-statsfigures.pdf. Accessed March 8, 2019.’’ is 

corrected to read ‘‘2019: https://

www.arthritis.org/getmedia/e1256607- 

fa87-4593-aa8a-8db4f291072a/2019- 

abtn-final-march-2019.pdf. Accessed 

May 13, 2021.’’ 

Karuna Seshasai, 

Executive Secretary to the Department, 

Department of Health and Human Services. 

[FR Doc. 2021–13481 Filed 6–23–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2020–0063; 

FF09E22000 FXES1113090FEDR 212] 

RIN 1018–BD83 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Reclassifying Smooth 

Coneflower as Threatened With 

Section 4(d) Rule 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 

reclassify from endangered to 

threatened (‘‘downlist’’) the smooth 

coneflower (Echinacea laevigata) under 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act) due to improvements in 

the species’ overall status since the 

original listing in 1992. This proposed 

action is based on a thorough review of 

the best available scientific and 

commercial information, which 

indicates that the species’ status has 

improved such that it is not currently in 

danger of extinction throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range, but that 

it is still likely to become so in the 

foreseeable future. This proposed rule 

completes the 5-year status review for 

the species, initiated on March 12, 2018. 

If this proposal is finalized, smooth 

coneflower would be reclassified as a 

threatened species under the Act. We 

seek information, data, and comments 

from the public on this proposal. We 

also propose to establish a rule under 

section 4(d) of the Act for the protection 

of smooth coneflower. 

DATES: We will accept comments 

received or postmarked on or August 23, 

2021. Comments submitted 

electronically using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, 

below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time on the closing date. We 

must receive requests for public 

hearings in writing, at the address 

shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT, by August 9, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this proposed rule by one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, 

enter the Docket Number for this 

proposed rule, which is FWS–R4–ES– 

2020–0063. Then, click on the Search 

button. On the resulting page, in the 

Search panel on the left side of the 

screen, under the Document Type 

heading, check the Proposed Rule box to 

locate this document. You may submit 

a comment by clicking on ‘‘Comment 

Now!’’ 

(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail 

to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: 

FWS–R4–ES–2020–0063, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3803. 

We request that you send comments 

only by the methods described above. 

We will post all comments on http://

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide to us (see 

Information Requested, below, for more 

information). 

Document availability: This proposed 

rule and supporting documents 

(including the Recovery Plan) are 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

under Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2020– 

0063. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pete 

Benjamin, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Raleigh Ecological 

Services Field Office, 551–F Pylon 

Drive, Raleigh, NC 27606; telephone 

(919) 856–4520. Individuals who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Relay 

Service at (800) 877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary 

Why we need to publish a rule. Under 

the Act, a species may warrant 

reclassification from endangered to 

threatened if it no longer meets the 

definition of endangered (in danger of 

extinction). The smooth coneflower is 

listed as endangered, and we are 

proposing to reclassify the smooth 

coneflower as threatened (i.e., 

‘‘downlist’’ the species) because we 

have determined it is not currently in 

danger of extinction. Downlisting a 

species as a threatened species can only 

be made by issuing a rulemaking. 

What this document does. This rule 

proposes to reclassify the smooth 

coneflower from endangered to 

threatened on the Federal List of 

Endangered and Threatened Plants 

(List), with a rule issued under section 

4(d) of the Act to ensure the continued 

conservation of this species. This rule 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS