33192 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

appropriate, for application to the 

staffing needs of public employee only 

Plans. However, the State has given 

satisfactory assurance in its Plan that it 

will meet the staffing requirements of 29 

CFR 1956.10. The State has also given 

satisfactory assurances of adequate State 

matching funds (50%) to support the 

Plan and is requesting initial Federal 

funding of $1,500,000 for a total initial 

program effort of $3 million. 

Although the State Acts set forth the 

general authority and scope for 

implementing the Illinois Public 

Employee Plan, the Plan is 

developmental under the terms of 29 

CFR 1956.2(b), in that specific rules, 

regulations, and implementing 

procedures must still be adopted or 

revised to carry out the Plan and make 

it structurally ‘‘at least as effective’’ as 

Federal OSHA and fully operational. 

The Plan sets forth a timetable for the 

accomplishment of these and other 

developmental goals within three years 

of Plan approval. This timetable 

addresses such general areas as the 

adoption of standards and the revision 

of regulations governing enforcement, 

consultation, variances, contested cases, 

employee access to information, and 

recordkeeping. Other developmental 

aspects include hiring and training of 

staff, participation in OSHA’s 

management information system, 

development of a Field Operations 

Manual and all other implementing 

policies, procedures and instruction 

necessary for the operation of an 

effective program. The State has 

extensively revised its initial State Plan 

submission to address a number of 

issues which were raised during the 

course of Federal review of the Illinois 

Plan and that required further 

clarification from the State. 

D. Request for Public Comment and 

Opportunity To Request Hearing 

Public comment on the Illinois Public 

Employee Only State Plan is hereby 

requested. Interested persons are invited 

to submit written data, views, and 

comments with respect to this proposed 

initial State Plan approval. These 

comments must be received on or before 

August 10, 2009. Written submissions 

must clearly identify the issues that are 

addressed and the positions taken with 

respect to each issue. The State of 

Illinois will be afforded the opportunity 

to respond to each submission. The 

Illinois Department of Labor must also 

publish appropriate notice within the 

State of Illinois within 5 days of 

publication of this notice, announcing 

OSHA’s proposal to approve an Illinois 

State Plan for Public Employees Only, 

contingent on the availability of 

appropriated funds, and giving notice of 

the opportunity for public comment. 

Pursuant to 29 CFR 1902.39(f), 

interested persons may request an 

informal hearing concerning the 

proposed initial State Plan approval. 

Such requests also must be received on 

or before August 10, 2009 and may be 

submitted electronically, by facsimile, 

or by regular mail, hand delivery, 

express mail, messenger or courier 

service, as indicated under ADDRESSES

above. Such requests must present 

particularized written objections to the 

proposed initial State Plan approval. 

The Assistant Secretary will decide 

within 30 days of the last day for filing 

written views or comments and requests 

for a hearing whether the objections 

raised are substantial and, if so, will 

publish notice of the time and place of 

the scheduled hearing. 

The Assistant Secretary will, within a 

reasonable time after the close of the 

comment period or after the certification 

of the record if a hearing is held, 

publish a decision in the Federal 

Register. All written and oral 

submissions, as well as other 

information gathered by OSHA, will be 

considered in any action taken. The 

record of this proceeding, including 

written comments and requests for 

hearing, and all materials submitted in 

response to this notice and at any 

subsequent hearing, are available at 

http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA 

Docket Office at the address above. 

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

OSHA certifies pursuant to the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) that the proposed 

initial approval of the Illinois State Plan 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. By its own terms, the Plan will 

have no effect on private sector 

employment, but is limited to the State 

and its political subdivisions. Moreover, 

the Illinois Safety Inspection and 

Education Act has been in effect since 

1961 and the Illinois Health and Safety 

Act has been in effect since 1936, when 

the State first established a safety and 

health program. Since 1985, the Illinois 

program for public employees has been 

in operation under the Illinois 

Department of Labor with State funding 

and most public sector employers in the 

State, including small units of local 

government, have been subject to its 

terms. Compliance with State OSHA 

standards is required by State law; 

Federal approval of a State Plan imposes 

regulatory requirements only on the 

agency responsible for administering the 

State Plan. Accordingly, no new 

obligations would be placed on public 

sector employers as a result of Federal 

approval of the Plan. 

F. Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

emphasizes consultation between 

Federal agencies and the States and 

establishes specific review procedures 

the Federal government must follow as 

it carries out policies which affect state 

or local governments. OSHA has 

consulted extensively with Illinois 

throughout the development, 

submission and consideration of its 

proposed State Plan. Although OSHA 

has determined that the requirements 

and consultation procedures provided 

in Executive Order 13132 are not 

applicable to initial approval decisions 

under the Act, which have no effect 

outside the particular State receiving the 

approval, OSHA has reviewed the 

Illinois initial approval decision 

proposed today, and believes it is 

consistent with the principles and 

criteria set forth in the Executive Order. 

G. Authority and Signature 

This document was prepared under 

the direction of Jordan Barab, Acting 

Assistant Secretary of Labor for 

Occupational Safety and Health. It is 

issued under Section 18 of the 

Occupational Safety and Health Act of 

1970 (29 U.S.C. 667), 29 CFR Parts 1956 

and 1902, and Secretary of Labor’s 

Order No. 5–2007 (72 FR 31160). 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of 

July 2009. 

Jordan Barab, 

Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for 

Occupational Safety and Health. 

[FR Doc. E9–16379 Filed 7–9–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 59 

RIN 2900–AM70 

Grants to States for Construction or 

Acquisition of State Home Facilities— 

Update of Authorized Beds 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its 

regulations regarding grants to States for 

construction or acquisition of State 

homes to update the maximum number 

of nursing home and domiciliary beds 

designated for each State and to amend 

the definition of ‘‘State’’ for purposes of 

these grants to include Guam, the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 33193 

Northern Mariana Islands, and 

American Samoa. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 8, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be 

submitted by: Mail or hand-delivery to 

Director, Regulations Management 

(02REG), Department of Veterans 

Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., 

Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; fax 

to (202) 273–9026; or e-mail at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Comments should 

indicate that they are submitted in 

response to ‘‘RIN 2900–AM70—Grants 

to States for Construction or Acquisition 

of State Home Facilities—Update of 

Authorized Beds.’’ All 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 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James F. Burris, MD, Chief Consultant, 

Geriatrics and Extended Care State 

Home Construction Grant Program 

(114), Veterans Health Administration, 

Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 

Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 

20420, (202) 461–6774. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Congress 

has authorized VA to provide grants to 

States for the construction or acquisition 

of State home facilities for the provision 

of care to veterans. See 38 U.S.C. 8131– 

8138. The term ‘‘State home’’ means ‘‘a 

home established by a State (other than 

a possession) for veterans disabled by 

age, disease, or otherwise who by reason 

of such disability are incapable of 

earning a living’’ and ‘‘includes such a 

home which furnishes nursing home 

care for veterans.’’ 38 U.S.C. 101(19). 

For purposes of State home grants, the 

term ‘‘State’’ means each of the several 

States and Territories of the United 

States, the District of Columbia, and the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, see 38 

U.S.C. 101(20), but not possessions of 

the United States, see 38 U.S.C. 101(19), 

8131(2). The Department of the Interior, 

which has administrative responsibility 

for coordinating Federal policy in Island 

groups in the Insular Area, has 

identified Guam and American Samoa 

as territories of the United States, and 

the Northern Mariana Islands as a 

Commonwealth in Political Union with 

the United States, which is treated as a 

U.S. territory for purposes of the State 

home grant program, see 

VAOPGCCONCL 10–98. The regulatory 

definition of the term ‘‘State’’ in current 

38 CFR 59.2 already includes the several 

States, the District of Columbia, the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the 

Virgin Islands. We propose to amend 

this definition to include Guam, the 

Northern Mariana Islands, and 

American Samoa. 

Section 8134(a)(2) of title 38, U.S.C., 

mandates that VA prescribe for each 

State the number of nursing home and 

domiciliary beds for which grants may 

be furnished, which the proposed note 

to 38 CFR 59.40(a) would refer to as a 

State’s ‘‘unmet need’’ number. To 

compute this number, VA estimates for 

each State the maximum number of 

nursing home and domiciliary beds 

needed by veterans in that State (which 

is the maximum number of such beds 

designated for each State, as shown on 

the chart in proposed § 59.40(a)), and 

then subtracts the number of existing 

State home beds plus the number of 

those beds under construction or that 

would be constructed in accordance 

with the State’s grant applications. In 

addition, section 8134(a)(3) mandates 

that VA prioritize State home grant 

applications. The priorities set forth in 

the law require VA to compute whether 

a State applying for a grant has a great, 

significant, or limited need for State 

home beds. VA currently uses a State’s 

‘‘unmet need’’ number to determine 

whether the State has a great, 

significant, or limited need for new 

State home beds. See 38 CFR 59.50(e). 

The Veterans Millennium Health Care 

and Benefits Act (the ‘‘Act’’) (Public 

Law 106–117, enacted on November 30, 

1999) requires that, not less often than 

every four years, VA must review and, 

as necessary, revise the regulations 

concerning the maximum number of 

State home beds designated for each 

State. 38 U.S.C. 8134(a)(4). Section 

8134(a)(2) requires that these numbers 

be based on the projected demand for 

nursing home and domiciliary care on 

November 30, 2009 (10 years after the 

date of enactment of the Act) by 

veterans who at such time are 65 years 

of age or older and who reside in that 

State. In 2001, VA originally established 

the maximum number of State home 

beds for each State based on the 

projected demand for such beds in 2009. 

See 66 FR 33845–46 (June 26, 2001). VA 

now believes that Congress intended VA 

to recalculate the maximum number of 

beds for each State based on the 

projected demand for care ten years in 

the future and that this method would 

be consistent with the Act’s requirement 

for establishing maximum State home 

bed numbers. VA thus proposes to 

revise in proposed § 59.40(a) the 

maximum bed numbers based on the 

projected demand from veterans who, in 

2020, are 65 years of age or older and 

who reside in that State. 

To compute the maximum number of 

beds for each State in compliance with 

the Act, we first estimated the total 

number of veterans 65 years of age or 

older residing in each State, projected to 

the year 2020. We then totaled the 

projected population of these veterans at 

8,672,045, which would be an increase 

from the 2000 projected population of 

such veterans in 2009. In computing 

these estimates, we considered many 

factors, such as movement of these 

veterans to new States, the mortality 

rate of these veterans, and the fact that 

the life expectancy of these veterans is 

projected to be longer than before. We 

then considered the projected total 

demand for nursing home and 

domiciliary beds in State homes. In 

2000, we estimated the demand in 2009 

would be for 55,299 State home beds 

nationwide. We believe that this 

estimated demand may also be used for 

2020, despite the estimated increase in 

the projected veteran population, due to 

the many emerging alternatives to 

institutional long-term care and 

advancing technologies, such as 

Telehealth, Home-Based Primary Care, 

and Respite Care, and due to the fact 

that veterans are choosing to stay longer 

in their own homes. VA’s philosophy is 

to provide extended care services in the 

least restrictive environment that is safe 

for the veteran, and whenever possible 

in non-institutional home and 

community-based settings. VA now 

provides a spectrum of non-institutional 

extended care services including home 

telehealth, homemaker/home health 

aide, skilled home care, home-based 

primary care, adult day healthcare, inhome respite care, and hospice and 

palliative care that were unavailable or 

not widely available in 2000. VA has 

been increasing the capacity to provide 

these services in recent years and will 

continue to do so in order to meet the 

demand. Many similar services are now 

available in the private sector through 

Medicare/Medicaid and long-term care 

insurance, and some veterans will 

choose to avail themselves of those 

services rather than seeking care from 

VA. The non-institutional services make 

it possible for many veterans who 

would otherwise require nursing home 

care to remain in their own homes, and 

reduce the need for additional nursing 

home beds. New technologic advances 

that may become available over the next 

decade, such as robotic assistive 

devices, will also reduce the need for 

additional nursing home beds. It is 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
33194 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

likely that these trends will offset the 

growth in population and mean that no 

additional nursing home beds will be 

needed beyond those previously 

projected. Should these assumptions 

prove incorrect, VA will adjust the total 

number of beds in a future revision of 

this regulation. ‘‘We are specifically 

interested in comments concerning this 

analysis and our estimate that the 

demand in 2020 for State home beds 

will be for 55,299 nationwide. 

We allocated the 55,299 beds based 

on the percentage of veterans who in 

2020 are projected to reside in each 

State. Although the projected total 

demand for State home beds nationwide 

will remain the same in 2020, some 

States will experience an increase and 

other States a decrease in the maximum 

number of beds that are eligible to 

receive a grant from the State Veterans 

Home Construction Grant program 

depending on the projected population 

of veterans 65 years of age or over for 

each State. The table below shows the 

changes in the maximum numbers of 

beds for each State. We would welcome 

comments regarding our projections for 

individual States. 

State Old max # of beds 

New max # 

of beds 

(based on 

2020 

projections) 

Difference 

(+/¥) 

Alabama ........................................................................ 883 ................................................................................ 1007 124 

Alaska ........................................................................... 79 .................................................................................. 179 100 

American Samoa .......................................................... not applicable ............................................................... 0 0 

Arizona .......................................................................... 1068 .............................................................................. 1520 452 

Arkansas ....................................................................... 557 ................................................................................ 653 96 

California ....................................................................... 5754 .............................................................................. 4363 ¥1391 

Colorado ....................................................................... 717 ................................................................................ 1114 397 

Connecticut ................................................................... 738 ................................................................................ 559 ¥179 

Delaware ....................................................................... 165 ................................................................................ 207 42 

DC ................................................................................. 104 ................................................................................ 83 ¥21 

Florida ........................................................................... 4471 .............................................................................. 4049 ¥422 

Georgia ......................................................................... 1202 .............................................................................. 1975 773 

Guam ............................................................................ not applicable ............................................................... 12 12 

Hawaii ........................................................................... 216 ................................................................................ 268 52 

Idaho ............................................................................. 233 ................................................................................ 394 161 

Illinois ............................................................................ 2271 .............................................................................. 1754 ¥517 

Indiana .......................................................................... 1209 .............................................................................. 1216 7 

Iowa .............................................................................. 632 ................................................................................ 578 ¥54 

Kansas .......................................................................... 542 ................................................................................ 518 ¥24 

Kentucky ....................................................................... 759 ................................................................................ 818 59 

Louisiana ....................................................................... 785 ................................................................................ 638 ¥147 

Maine ............................................................................ 301 ................................................................................ 362 61 

Maryland ....................................................................... 1020 .............................................................................. 1102 82 

Massachusetts .............................................................. 1348 .............................................................................. 944 ¥404 

Michigan ........................................................................ 1896 .............................................................................. 1786 ¥110 

Minnesota ..................................................................... 932 ................................................................................ 1058 126 

Mississippi ..................................................................... 500 ................................................................................ 480 ¥20 

Missouri ......................................................................... 1230 .............................................................................. 1257 27 

Montana ........................................................................ 198 ................................................................................ 281 83 

Nebraska ....................................................................... 355 ................................................................................ 371 16 

Nevada .......................................................................... 428 ................................................................................ 649 221 

New Hampshire ............................................................ 264 ................................................................................ 361 97 

New Jersey ................................................................... 1683 .............................................................................. 992 ¥691 

New Mexico .................................................................. 344 ................................................................................ 417 73 

New York ...................................................................... 3220 .............................................................................. 2209 ¥1011 

North Carolina ............................................................... 1454 .............................................................................. 1900 446 

North Dakota ................................................................. 121 ................................................................................ 137 16 

Northern Mariana Islands ............................................. not applicable ............................................................... 1 1 

Ohio .............................................................................. 2530 .............................................................................. 2143 ¥387 

Oklahoma ...................................................................... 747 ................................................................................ 766 19 

Oregon .......................................................................... 804 ................................................................................ 907 103 

Pennsylvania ................................................................. 3173 .............................................................................. 2336 ¥837 

Puerto Rico ................................................................... 350 ................................................................................ 288 ¥62 

Rhode Island ................................................................. 254 ................................................................................ 157 ¥97 

South Carolina .............................................................. 750 ................................................................................ 1089 339 

South Dakota ................................................................ 155 ................................................................................ 179 24 

Tennessee .................................................................... 1050 .............................................................................. 1311 261 

Texas ............................................................................ 3226 .............................................................................. 4119 893 

Utah .............................................................................. 304 ................................................................................ 426 122 

Vermont ........................................................................ 124 ................................................................................ 1312 1188 

Virginia .......................................................................... 1312 .............................................................................. 1903 591 

Virgin Islands ................................................................ 8 .................................................................................... 12 4 

Washington ................................................................... 1215 .............................................................................. 1687 472 

West Virginia ................................................................. 455 ................................................................................ 406 ¥49 

Wisconsin ...................................................................... 1070 .............................................................................. 1062 ¥8 

Wyoming ....................................................................... 93 .................................................................................. 154 61 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 33195 

In prioritizing applications to receive 

grants, VA identifies States as having a 

‘‘great’’, ‘‘significant’’, or ‘‘limited’’ need 

for additional beds. ‘‘Great’’ need is 

defined as a need for 2,000 or more new 

beds; ‘‘significant’’ need as a need for 

1,000–1,999 new beds, and ‘‘limited’’ as 

a need for 999 or fewer new beds. A 

State that moves into a higher priority 

category as a result of the reallocation of 

beds in this rule will be more likely to 

receive a future grant than under the 

current allocation of beds. A State that 

moves into a lower priority category 

will be less likely to receive a future 

grant than under the current allocation 

of beds. A State that remains within the 

same priority category (even if the 

allocation of beds to the State increases 

or decreases) will have an equal 

likelihood of receiving a future grant 

under the new allocation as under the 

current allocation. 

Our decision to use the same 

estimated demand for State home beds 

nationwide in 2020, as that which was 

projected for 2009, would not keep 

States from receiving grants for 

construction of new State home beds. At 

this time, there are 28,823 recognized 

State home beds. In addition, States are 

building facilities that when recognized 

will add 2,256 beds for a total of 31,079 

beds. Therefore, States will soon have in 

use 56 percent of the total estimated 

number of State home beds needed in 

2020. Of course, States will also need to 

replace existing State home facilities 

that become obsolete or otherwise need 

replacing. We thus believe that most 

States would continue to be able to 

apply for State home grants if that is 

what the State chooses to do. 

Unfunded Mandates 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C 1532) requires that 

agencies prepare an assessment of 

anticipated costs and benefits before 

issuing any rule that may result in an 

expenditure by the State, local, or Tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

(adjusted annually for inflation) in any 

given year. This proposed rule would 

have no such effect on State, local, or 

Tribal governments, or on the private 

sector. 

Executive Order 12866 

Executive Order 12866 directs 

agencies to assess all 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, and other advantages; 

distributive impacts; and equity). The 

Executive Order classifies 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 the Executive 

Order. VA has examined the economic, 

interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy 

implications of this proposed rule and 

has concluded that it does constitute a 

significant regulatory action under the 

Executive Order. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This document contains no provisions 

constituting a collection of information 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3521). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Secretary hereby certifies that 

this proposed rule would 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. The 

proposed rule would affect grants to 

States and would not directly affect 

small entities. Therefore, pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 605(b), this proposed rule would 

be exempt from the initial and final 

regulatory flexibility analyses 

requirements of sections 603 and 604. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

The Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance program number and title for 

this proposed rule is as follows: 64.005, 

Grants to States for Construction of State 

Home Facilities. 

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 59 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism, 

Claims, Day care, Dental health, Drug 

abuse, Foreign relations, Government 

contracts, Grant programs—health, 

Grant 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, Travel 

and transportation expenses, and 

Veterans. 

Approved: April 3, 2009. 

John R. Gingrich, 

Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs. 

For the reasons stated above, the 

Department of Veterans Affairs proposes 

to amend 38 CFR part 59 as follows: 

PART 59—GRANTS TO STATES FOR 

CONSTRUCTION OR ACQUISITION OF 

STATE HOMES 

1. The authority citation for part 59 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 101, 501, 1710, 1742, 

8105, 8131–8138. 

2. Amend § 59.2 by revising the 

definition of ‘‘State’’ to read as follows: 

§ 59.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

State means each of the several States, 

the District of Columbia, the Virgin 

Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto 

Rico, Guam, the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands, and 

American Samoa. 

* * * * * 

3. Amend § 59.40 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 59.40 Maximum number of nursing home 

care and domiciliary care beds for veterans 

by State. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section, a State may not 

request a grant for a project to construct 

or acquire a new State home facility, to 

increase the number of beds available at 

a State home facility, or to replace beds 

at a State home facility if the project 

would increase the total number of State 

home nursing home and domiciliary 

beds in that State beyond the maximum 

number designated for that State, as 

shown in the following chart. The 

provisions of 38 U.S.C. 8134 require VA 

to prescribe for each State the number 

of nursing home and domiciliary beds 

for which grants may be furnished (i.e., 

the unmet need). A State’s unmet need 

for State home nursing home and 

domiciliary beds is the number in the 

following chart for that State minus the 

sum of the number of nursing home and 

domiciliary beds in operation at State 

home facilities and the number of State 

home nursing home and domiciliary 

beds not yet in operation but for which 

a grant has either been requested or 

awarded under this part. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
33196 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

State 

Maximum number 

of state home 

nursing home & 

domiciliary beds 

based on 2020 

projections 

Alabama .......................... 1,007 

Alaska ............................. 179 

American Samoa ............ 0 

Arizona ............................ 1,520 

Arkansas ......................... 653 

California ......................... 4,363 

Colorado ......................... 1,114 

Connecticut ..................... 559 

Delaware ......................... 207 

District of Columbia ........ 83 

Florida ............................. 4,049 

Georgia ........................... 1,975 

Guam .............................. 12 

Hawaii ............................. 268 

Idaho ............................... 394 

Illinois .............................. 1,754 

Indiana ............................ 1,216 

Iowa ................................ 578 

Kansas ............................ 518 

Kentucky ......................... 818 

Louisiana ........................ 638 

Maine .............................. 362 

Maryland ......................... 1,102 

Massachusetts ................ 944 

Michigan ......................... 1,786 

Minnesota ....................... 1,058 

Mississippi ...................... 480 

Missouri .......................... 1,257 

Montana .......................... 281 

Nebraska ........................ 371 

Nevada ........................... 649 

New Hampshire .............. 361 

New Jersey ..................... 992 

New Mexico .................... 417 

New York ........................ 2,209 

North Carolina ................ 1,900 

North Dakota .................. 137 

Northern Mariana Islands 1 

Ohio ................................ 2,143 

Oklahoma ....................... 766 

Oregon ............................ 907 

Pennsylvania .................. 2,336 

Puerto Rico ..................... 288 

Rhode Island .................. 157 

South Carolina ................ 1,089 

South Dakota .................. 179 

Tennessee ...................... 1,311 

Texas .............................. 4,119 

Utah ................................ 426 

Vermont .......................... 142 

Virginia ............................ 1,903 

Virgin Islands .................. 12 

Washington ..................... 1,687 

West Virginia .................. 406 

Wisconsin ....................... 1,062 

Wyoming ......................... 154 

Note to § 59.40(a): The provisions of 38 

U.S.C. 8134 require that the ‘‘unmet need’’ 

numbers be based on a 10-year projection of 

demand for nursing home and domiciliary 

care by veterans who at such time are 65 

years of age or older and who reside in that 

State. In determining the projected demand, 

VA must take into account travel distances 

for veterans and their families. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E9–16341 Filed 7–9–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0344; FRL–8929–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

California 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

state implementation plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the State of 

California on June 15, 2004 and 

February 3, 2009, relating to 

reformulated gasoline (RFG) and diesel 

fuel sold or supplied as motor vehicle 

fuels in California. The revisions 

relating to RFG include California Phase 

3 RFG (CaRFG3) regulations, correction 

of errors and streamlined requirements 

for compliance with and enforcement of 

the CaRFG3 standards, and an update to 

the State’s predictive model to mitigate 

permeation emissions associated with 

the use of ethanol as a fuel additive. The 

revisions relating to diesel fuel establish 

test methods for determining the 

aromatic hydrocarbon content in diesel 

fuel and lower the maximum allowable 

sulfur content for motor vehicle diesel 

fuel. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 10, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2009–0344, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: buss.jeffrey@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Jeffrey Buss (Air-2), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA 

will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey Buss, EPA Region IX, (415) 947– 

4152, buss.jeffrey@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

I. General Information 

A. Does This Action Apply to Me? 

Regulated categories and entities 

potentially affected by this proposed 

action include: 

Category NAICSs 

codes a SIC codes b Examples of potentially regulated parties 

Industry ............................................................................................. 324110 2911 Petroleum refiners. 

Industry ............................................................................................. 422710 5171 Gasoline Marketers and Distributors. 

422720 5172 

a North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). 

bStandard Industrial Classification (SIC) system code. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1