Federal Register Vol. 82, No.68,

Pursuant to the provisions of section 10(a) of the FACA (5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), this notice informs the public that the Plant Variety Protection Office (PVPO) is sponsoring a meeting of the Board on April 27, 2017. The Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA) (7 U.S.C. 2321 et seq.) provides legal protection in the form of intellectual property rights to developers of new varieties of plants, which are reproduced sexually by seed or are tuber-propagated. A certificate of Plant Variety Protection is awarded to an owner of a crop variety after an examination shows that it is new, distinct from other varieties, genetically uniform and stable through successive generations. The term of protection is 20 years for most crops and 25 years for trees, shrubs, and vines. The PVPA also provides for a statutory Board (7 U.S.C. 2327). The Board is composed of 14 individuals who are experts in various areas of development and represent the seed industry sector, academia and government. The duties of the Board are to: (1) Advise the Secretary concerning the adoption of rules and regulations to facilitate the proper administration of the FACA; (2) provide advisory counsel to the Secretary on appeals concerning decisions on applications by the PVP Office and on requests for emergency public-interest compulsory licenses; and (3) advise the Secretary on any other matters under the Regulations and Rules of Practice and on all questions under Section 44 of the FACA, “Public Interest in Wide Usage” (7 U.S.C. 2404).

Meeting Agenda: The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the PVPO 2017 achievements, the electronic application system, and PVP cooperation with other countries. The Board plans to discuss program activities that encourage the development of new plant varieties and address appeals to the Secretary. The meeting will be open to the public. Those wishing to participate are encouraged to pre-register by April 16, 2017, by contacting Maria Pratt, Program Analyst; Telephone: (202) 260- 8983; Email: [email protected].

Meeting Accommodation: The meeting at USDA will provide reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need reasonable accommodation to participate in this public meeting, please notify Maria Pratt at: Email: [email protected] or (202) 268- 8983. Determinations for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. Minutes of the meeting will be available for public review 30 days following the meeting on the internet at http://www.ams.usda.gov/PVPO.

Title: Event Appearance Requests for the Secretary or members of his staff.

OMB Number: 0506-New.

Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from approval date.

Type of Request: New information collection.

Abstract: A web form that collects information on events that the public would like the Secretary to participate in, or those in which the incoming Secretary may want to use to reach back out to interested parties to invite them to events. Information that will be collected is as follows: Organization, Address, Phone/Cell Number, First and last name of point of contact, Email Address, Type of event, Date of event, Event location, Secretary's role, Number of attendees, Press open or closed.

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 min per response.

Type of Respondents: Individual, Businesses, Not-for profit; State, Local or Tribal governments.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 5,000.

Estimated Number of Responses: 10,000.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 2.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 1,000.

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to Tomasina Brown, Office of Communications U.S. Department of Agriculture. All comments received will be available for public inspection during regular business hours at the same address. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

Background: The CINTAC was established under the discretionary authority of the Secretary of Commerce and in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), in response to an identified need for consensus advice from U.S. industry to the U.S. Government regarding the development and administration of programs to expand United States exports of civil nuclear goods and services in accordance with applicable U.S. laws and regulations, including advice on how U.S. civil nuclear goods and services export policies, programs, and activities will affect the U.S. civil nuclear industry's competitiveness and ability to participate in the international market.

Topics to be considered: The agenda for the Thursday, April 27, 2017 CINTAC meeting is as follows:

1. Discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. App. (10)(a)(1) and 10(a)(3).

2. Public comment period. Public attendance is limited and available on a first-come, first-served basis. Members of the public wishing to attend the meeting must notify Mr. Jonathan Chesebro at the contact information above by 5:00 p.m. EDT on Friday, April 21, 2017 in order to pre-register. Please specify any requests for reasonable accommodation at least five business days in advance of the meeting. Last minute requests will be accepted, but may not be possible to fill.

A limited amount of time will be available for pertinent brief oral comments from members of the public attending the meeting. To accommodate as many speakers as possible, the time for public comments will be limited to two (2) minutes per person, with a total public comment period of 60 minutes. Individuals wishing to reserve speaking time during the meeting must contact Mr. Chesebro and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the comments and the name and address of the proposed participant by 5:00 p.m. EDT on Friday, April 21, 2017. If the number of registrants requesting to make statements is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the meeting, ITA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers.

Any member of the public may submit pertinent written comments concerning the CINTAC's affairs at any time before and after the meeting. Comments may be submitted to the Civil Nuclear Trade Advisory Committee, Office of Energy & Environmental Industries, Mail Stop 28018, 1401 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20230. For consideration during the meeting, and to ensure transmission to the Committee prior to the meeting, comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT on Friday, April 21, 2017. Comments received after that date will be distributed to the members but may not be considered at the meeting.

Copies of CINTAC meeting minutes will be available within 90 days of the meeting.

Amendments to revise the selection process.

It has been determined that the selection process of companies interested in participating in the mission will be vetted on a rolling basis. All applications will be evaluated on their ability to meet certain conditions and best satisfy the selection criteria outlined under the conditions of participation clause. Applications for this Mission will be accepted through May 11, 2017. The Department of Commerce will evaluate all applications and inform applicants of selection decisions as soon as possible after this application deadline (and after that date if space remains and scheduling constraints permit).

Contact Information: Pamela Kirkland, International Trade Specialist, Trade Missions, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, Tel: 202-482-3587, Fax: 202-482-9000, [email protected].

Background: The Secretary of Commerce established the REEEAC pursuant to discretionary authority and in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), on July 14, 2010. The REEEAC was re-chartered on June 18, 2012, June 12, 2014, and June 9, 2016. The REEEAC provides the Secretary of Commerce with consensus advice from the private sector on the development and administration of programs and policies to expand the export competitiveness of the U.S. renewable energy and energy efficiency products and services.

On May 4, the REEEAC will hold the third in-person meeting of its new charter term and hold REEEAC sub-committee working sessions, discuss next steps for each sub-committee, consider recommendations for approval, and hear from officials from the Department of Commerce and other agencies on major issues impacting the competitiveness of the U.S. renewable energy and energy efficiency industries.

The meeting will be open to the public and will be accessible to people with disabilities. All guests are required to register in advance by the deadline identified under the DATES caption. Requests for auxiliary aids must be submitted by the registration deadline. Last minute requests will be accepted, but may be impossible to fill.

A limited amount of time before the close of the meeting will be available for oral comments from members of the public attending the meeting. To accommodate as many speakers as possible, the time for public comments will be limited to two to five minutes per person (depending on number of public participants). Individuals wishing to reserve speaking time during the meeting must contact Ms. Gunderson and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the comments, as well as the name and address of the proposed participant by 5:00 p.m. EST on Friday, April 28, 2017. If the number of registrants requesting to make statements is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the meeting, the International Trade Administration may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers. Speakers are requested to submit a copy of their oral comments by email to Ms. Gunderson for distribution to the participants in advance of the meeting.

Any member of the public may submit written comments concerning the REEEAC's affairs at any time before or after the meeting. Comments may be submitted to the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Advisory Committee, c/o: Victoria Gunderson, Designated Federal Officer, Office of Energy and Environmental Industries, U.S. Department of Commerce; 1401 Constitution Avenue NW.; Mail Stop: 4053; Washington, DC 20230. To be considered during the meeting, written comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on Friday, April 28, 2017, to ensure transmission to the REEEAC prior to the meeting. Comments received after that date will be distributed to the members but may not be considered at the meeting.

Copies of REEEAC meeting minutes will be available within 30 days following the meeting.

I. Abstract

This request is for extension of a currently approved information collection.

National marine sanctuary regulations provide that the public may nominate special places of the marine environment through the sanctuary nomination process (15 CFR part 922). Persons wanting to submit nominations for consideration should submit information on the qualifying criteria and management considerations for the site to be nominated. The Office of National Marine Sanctuaries reviews the submissions, which could result in the nomination being added to an inventory of areas that NOAA may consider for sanctuary designation at some point in the future. Sanctuary designation is a separate public process that would be conducted pursuant to the requirements of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, and all other applicable laws.

Electronic applications submitted via email and paper nominations submitted via regular mail.

OMB Control Number: 0648-0682.

Form Number(s): None.

Type of Review: Regular (extension of a currently approved information collection).

Affected Public: Individuals or households; business or other for-profit organizations; not-for-profit institutions; state, local, or tribal government; federal government.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 10.

Estimated Time Per Response: 29 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 290.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $120 in recordkeeping/reporting costs.

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

Under U.S. law, trade secrets comprise commercially valuable information not generally known or readily ascertainable to the public, that are subject to reasonable measures to maintain confidentiality. In May 2016, the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) established a federal private civil cause of action for the misappropriation of a trade secret, with the aim to provide businesses with a uniform, reliable and predictable way to protect their valuable trade secrets anywhere in the country. Given this legislation and the continuing domestic and international attention to trade secrets, the USPTO will hold a public symposium on recent developments in the protection of trade secrets. Topics to be discussed include: (1) Measuring the Value of Secrecy; (2) Use of the DTSA in Practice; (3) Differences in Trade Secret Protection in Foreign Jurisdictions; and (4) Considerations of Business Owners in International Cases. Experts from academia, private legal practice, international organizations, and industry will serve as panelists.

The symposium will be held on May 8, 2017, at the auditorium of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Madison Building, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. The symposium will begin at 9 a.m. and end at 4 p.m. EDT. The agenda will be available a week in advance on the USPTO Web site, https://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/ip-policy/enforcement/trade-secret-symposium. Pre-registration is available at http://www.cvent.com/d/45q976. Attendees may also register at the door one half-hour prior to the beginning of the symposium.

The symposium will be physically accessible to people with disabilities. Individuals requiring accommodation, such as sign language interpretation or other ancillary aids, should communicate their needs to Hollis Robinson at the Office of Policy and International Affairs, by telephone at (571) 272-9300, by email at [email protected], or by postal mail addressed to: Mail Stop OPIA, United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450, ATTN: Hollis Robinson, at least seven (7) business days prior to the symposium.

Title: Adaption of Regulations to Incorporate Swaps—Records of Transactions (OMB Control No. 3038-0090). This is a request for an extension and revision of a currently approved information collection.

Abstract: The Commission recently amended Regulation 1.35(a) to change and clarify several of the existing recordkeeping requirements that apply to certain registrants and market participants. Records of Commodity Interest and Related Cash or Forward Transactions, 80 FR 80247 (Dec. 24, 2015). Specifically, the amendment to Regulation 1.35: (1) Excludes members of designated contract markets (“DCMs”) and members of swap execution facilities (“SEFs”) that are not registered or required to register with the Commission (“Unregistered Members”) from the requirement to keep written communications that lead to the execution of a commodity interest transaction and related cash or forward transactions; (2) excludes Unregistered Members from the requirement to maintain records in a particular form and manner; (3) excludes Unregistered Members from the requirement to retain text messages; (4) excludes commodity trading advisors (“CTAs”) that are members of a DCM or of a SEF from the requirement to record oral communications that lead to the execution of a transaction; and (5) clarifies the form and manner requirements that apply to required records.

In Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection Revision, Comment Request: Final Rule for Records of Commodity Interest and Related Cash or Forward Transactions, 80 FR 80327 (Dec. 24, 2015), the Commission addressed the PRA implications of this amendment of Regulation 1.35. First, the Commission estimated that changing Regulation 1.35(a) to exclude Unregisted Members from the requirement to keep written communications that lead to transaction execution will decrease the information collection burden under the rule by approximately one-half hour per week per entity. Second, the Commission estimated that excluding Unregistered Members from the requirement to maintain records in a particular form and manner will decrease the information collection burden by approximately one-half hour per month per entity. Third, the Commission estimated that excluding Unregistered Members from the requirement to retain text messages will decrease the information collection burden by approximately approximately one-half hour per month per entity. In connection with these estimates, the Commission estimated that there are approximately 3,200 Unregistered Members that will have their recordkeeping obligations reduced as a result of these three changes to Regulation 1.35(a). Next, the Commission estimated that excluding CTAs that are members of a DCM or of a SEF from the requirement to record oral communications that lead to transaction execution will decrease the information collection burden by approximately one-half hour per week per entity. In connection with this estimate, the Commission estimated that there are approximately 1,175 CTAs that will have their recordkeeping obligations reduced as a result of this change to Regulation 1.35(a). Finally, the Commission noted that because the revised form and manner requirements are a clarification of the prior requirements, the revised requirements do not increase or decrease the information collection burden.

In the Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection Revision, Comment Request: Final Rule for Records of Commodity Interest and Related Cash or Forward Transactions, the Commission requested comments on, among other things, its estimates regarding the modified information collection burdens associated with the changes to Regulation 1.35(a). The Commission did not receive any comments that addressed any of its estimates or any other aspect of the information collection.

Burden Statement: The amendment of Regulation 1.35 reduces the recordkeeping burdens of Unregistered Members and of CTAs that are members of a DCM or of a SEF. For each respondent that is an Unregistered Member, the Commission estimates that the amendment reduces the annual recordkeeping burden by a total of 38 hours. For each respondent that is a CTA, the Commission estimates that the amendment reduces the annual recordkeeping burden by a total of 26 hours.

The Commission estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

Respondents/Affected Entities: Futures Commission Merchants, Retail Foreign Exchange Dealers, Introducing Brokers, and Members of a DCM or of a SEF.

Estimated number of respondents: 6,000.

Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 321,449 hours.1

Frequency of collection: Ongoing.

There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection.

CPSC has submitted the following currently approved collection of information to OMB for extension:

Approximately 358 firms produce mattresses.1 The Standard for the Flammability of Mattresses and Mattress Pads, 16 CFR part 1632 (part 1632 standard), was promulgated under section 4 of the Flammable Fabrics Act (FFA), 15 U.S.C. 1193, to reduce unreasonable risks of burn injuries and deaths from fires associated with mattresses and mattress pads. The part 1632 standard prescribes requirements to test whether a mattress or mattress pad will resist ignition from a smoldering cigarette. The part 1632 standard also requires manufacturers to perform prototype tests of each combination of materials and construction methods used to produce mattresses or mattress pads and to obtain acceptable results from such testing. Manufacturers and importers must maintain the records and test results specified under the standard.

The Commission also promulgated the Standard for the Flammability (Open Flame) of Mattress Sets, 16 CFR part 1633 (part 1633 standard), under section 4 of the FFA to reduce deaths and injuries related to mattress fires, particularly those ignited by open-flame sources, such as lighters, candles, and matches. The part 1633 standard requires manufacturers to maintain certain records to document compliance with the standard, including maintaining records concerning prototype testing, pooling, and confirmation testing, and quality assurance procedures and any associated testing. The required records must be maintained for as long as mattress sets based on the prototype are in production and must be retained for 3 years thereafter. Although some larger manufacturers may produce mattresses based on more than 100 prototypes, most mattress manufacturers base their complying production on 15 to 20 prototypes. OMB previously approved the collection of information for 16 CFR parts 1632 and 1633, under control number 3041-0014, with an expiration date of April 30, 2017. The information collection requirements under the part 1632 standard do not duplicate the testing and recordkeeping requirements under the part 1633 standard.

16 CFR 1632: Staff estimates that there are 358 respondents. It is estimated that each respondent will spend 26 hours for testing and record keeping annually for a total of 9,308 hours (358 firms × 26 hours = 9,308). The hourly compensation for the time required for record keeping is $66.19 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Employer Costs for Employee Compensation,” June 2016, Table 9, total compensation of all management, professional, and related occupations in goods-producing industries: http://www.bls.gov/ncs). The annualized cost to respondents would be approximately $616,097 (9,308 hours × $66.19).

16 CFR 1633: The standard requires detailed documentation of prototype identification and testing records, model and prototype specifications, inputs used, name and location of suppliers, and confirmation of test records, if establishments choose to pool a prototype. This documentation is in addition to documentation already conducted by mattress manufacturers in their efforts to meet 16 CFR part 1632. Staff estimates that there are 358 respondents. Based on staff estimates, the recordkeeping requirements are expected to require about 4 hours and 44 minutes per establishment, per qualified prototype. Although some larger manufacturers reportedly are producing mattresses based on more than 100 prototypes, most mattress manufacturers probably base their complying production on 15 to 20 prototypes, according to an industry representative contacted by staff. Assuming that establishments qualify their production with an average of 20 different qualified prototypes, recordkeeping time is about 94.6 hours (4.73 hours x 20 prototypes) per establishment, per year. (Note that pooling among establishments or using a prototype qualification for longer than 1 year will reduce this estimate). This translates to an annual recordkeeping time cost to all mattress producers of 33,867 hours (94.6 hours x 358 firms). The hourly compensation for the time required for record keeping is $66.19 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Employer Costs for Employee Compensation,” June 2016, Table 9, total compensation of all management, professional, and related occupations in goods-producing industries: http://www.bls.gov/ncs). The annual total estimated costs for recordkeeping are approximately $2,241,657 (33,867 hours × $66.19).

The total estimated cost to the 358 firms for the burden hours associated with both 16 CFR part 1632 and 16 CFR part 1633 is approximately $2.86 million annually.

CPSC has submitted the following currently approved collection of information to OMB for extension.

The Commission has promulgated several standards under section 4 of the Flammable Fabrics Act (FFA), 15 U.S.C. 1193, to prohibit the use of dangerously flammable textiles and related materials in wearing apparel. Clothing and fabrics intended for use in clothing (except children's sleepwear in sizes 0 through 14) are subject to the Standard for the Flammability of Clothing Textiles (16 CFR part 1610). Clothing made from vinyl plastic film and vinyl plastic film intended for use in clothing (except children's sleepwear in sizes 0 through 14) are subject to the Standard for the Flammability of Vinyl Plastic Film (16 CFR part 1611). These standards prescribe a test to ensure that articles of wearing apparel, and fabrics and film intended for use in wearing apparel, are not dangerously flammable because of rapid and intense burning. (Children's sleepwear and fabrics and related materials intended for use in children's sleepwear in sizes 0 through 14 are subject to other, more stringent flammability standards codified at 16 CFR parts 1615 and 1616).

Section 8 of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1197) provides that a person who receives a guaranty in good faith that a product complies with an applicable flammability standard is not subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of the FFA resulting from the sale of any product covered by the guaranty. The Commission uses the information compiled and maintained by firms that issue these guaranties to help protect the public from risks of injury or death associated with flammable clothing and fabrics and vinyl film intended for use in clothing. In addition, the information helps the Commission arrange corrective actions if any products covered by a guaranty fail to comply with the applicable standard in a manner that creates a substantial risk of injury or death to the public. Section 8 of the FFA requires that a guaranty must be based on “reasonable and representative tests.” The testing and recordkeeping requirements by firms that issue guaranties are set forth under 16 CFR part 1610, subpart B, and 16 CFR part 1611, subpart B.

The Commission estimates that approximately 1,000 firms issue guaranties. Although the Commission's records indicate that approximately 675 firms have filed continuing guaranties at the CPSC, staff believes additional guarantees may be issued that are not filed with the Commission. Accordingly, staff has estimated the number of firms upwards to account for those guaranties. Staff estimated the burden hours based on an estimate of the time for each firm to conduct testing, issue guaranties, and to establish and maintain associated records.

• Burden Hours per Firm—An estimated 5 hours for testing per firm, using either the test and conditioning procedures in the regulations or alternate methods. Although many firms are exempt from testing to support guaranties under 16 CFR 1610.1(d), CPSC staff does not know the proportion of those firms that are testing vs. those that are exempt. Thus, staff has included testing for all firms in the burden estimates.

• Guaranties Issued per Firm—On average, 20 new guaranties are issued per firm per year for new fabrics or garments.

• Estimated Annual Testing Time per Firm—100 hours per firm (5 hours for testing × 20 guaranties issued = 100 hours per firm).

• Estimated Annual Recordkeeping per Firm—1 hour to create, record, and enter test data into a computerized dataset; 20 minutes (=0.3 hours) for annual review/removal of records; 20 minutes (=0.3 hours) to respond to one CPSC records request per year; for a total of 1.6 recordkeeping hours per firm (1 hour + .3 hours + .3 hours = 1.6 hours per firm).

• Total Estimated Annual Burden Hours per Firm—100 hours estimated annual testing time per firm + 1.6 estimated annual recordkeeping hours per firm = 101.6 hours per firm.

• Total Estimated Annual Industry Burden Hours—101.6 hours per firm × 1,000 firms issuing guaranties = 101,600 industry burden hours. The total annual industry burden imposed by the flammability standards for clothing textiles and vinyl plastic film and enforcement regulations on manufacturers and importers of garments, fabrics, and related materials is estimated to be about 101,600 hours (101.6 hours per firm × 1,000 firms).

• Total Annual Industry Cost—The hourly wage for the testing and recordkeeping required by the standards is approximately $66.19 (for management, professional, and related occupations in goods-producing industries, Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 2016), for an estimated annual cost to the industry of approximately $6.7 million (101,600 × $66.19 = $6,724,904).

Title: Associated Form; and OMB Number: USMA Candidate Procedures; On-line Candidate Portal and USMA Form 5-518; OMB Control Number 0702-0061.

Needs and Uses: West Point candidates provide personal background information that allows the West Point Admissions Committee to make subjective judgements on non-academic experiences. Data are also used by West Point's Office of Institutional Research for correlation with success in graduation and military careers.

Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

Annual Burden Hours: 17,933.

Number of Respondents: 53,800.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 53,800.

Average Burden per Response: 20 Minutes.

Frequency: On occasion.

The U.S. Military Academy (USMA) strives to motivate outstanding potential candidates to apply for admission to USMA. Once candidates are found, USMA collects information necessary to nurture them through successful completion of the application process.

Purpose of the Meeting: This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA) (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150. The Government-Industry Advisory Panel will review sections 2320 and 2321 of title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.), regarding rights in technical data and the validation of proprietary data restrictions and the regulations implementing such sections, for the purpose of ensuring that such statutory and regulatory requirements are best structured to serve the interest of the taxpayers and the national defense. The scope of the panel is as follows: (1) Ensuring that the Department of Defense (DoD) does not pay more than once for the same work, (2) Ensuring that the DoD contractors are appropriately rewarded for their innovation and invention, (3) Providing for cost-effective reprocurement, sustainment, modification, and upgrades to the DoD systems, (4) Encouraging the private sector to invest in new products, technologies, and processes relevant to the missions of the DoD, and (5) Ensuring that the DoD has appropriate access to innovative products, technologies, and processes developed by the private sector for commercial use.

Agenda: This will be the fifteenth meeting of the Government-Industry Advisory Panel. The panel will cover details of 10 U.S.C. 2320 and 2321, begin understanding the implementing regulations and detail the necessary groups within the private sector and government to provide supporting documentation for their review of these codes and regulations during follow-on meetings. Agenda items for this meeting will include the following: (1) Final review of tension point information papers; (2) Rewrite FY17 NDAA 2320 and 2321 language; (3) Review Report Framework and Format for Publishing; (4) Comment Adjudication & Planning for follow-on meeting.

Availability of Materials for the Meeting: A copy of the agenda or any updates to the agenda for the April 26-27 meeting will be available as requested or at the following site: https://database.faca.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=2561. It will also be distributed upon request.

Minor changes to the agenda will be announced at the meeting. All materials will be posted to the FACA database after the meeting.

Public Accessibility to the Meeting: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended, and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and subject to the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. Registration of members of the public who wish to attend the meeting will begin upon publication of this meeting notice and end three business days (April 21) prior to the start of the meeting. All members of the public must contact LTC Lunoff at the phone number or email listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to make arrangements for Pentagon escort, if necessary. Public attendees should arrive at the Pentagon's Visitor's Center, located near the Pentagon Metro Station's south exit and adjacent to the Pentagon Transit Center bus terminal with sufficient time to complete security screening no later than 8:30 a.m. on April 26-27. To complete security screening, please come prepared to present two forms of identification of which one must be a pictured identification card. Government and military DoD CAC holders are not required to have an escort, but are still required to pass through the Visitor's Center to gain access to the Building. Seating is limited and is on a first-to-arrive basis. Attendees will be asked to provide their name, title, affiliation, and contact information to include email address and daytime telephone number to the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Any interested person may attend the meeting, file written comments or statements with the committee, or make verbal comments from the floor during the public meeting, at the times, and in the manner, permitted by the committee.

Special Accommodations: The meeting venue is fully handicap accessible, with wheelchair access.

Individuals requiring special accommodations to access the public meeting or seeking additional information about public access procedures, should contact LTC Lunoff, the committee DFO, at the email address or telephone number listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

Written Comments or Statements: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140 and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments or statements to the Government-Industry Advisory Panel about its mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this public meeting. Written comments or statements should be submitted to LTC Lunoff, the committee DFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the email address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section in the following formats: Adobe Acrobat or Microsoft Word. The comment or statement must include the author's name, title, affiliation, address, and daytime telephone number. Written comments or statements being submitted in response to the agenda set forth in this notice must be received by the committee DFO at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that they may be made available to the Government-Industry Advisory Panel for its consideration prior to the meeting. Written comments or statements received after this date may not be provided to the panel until its next meeting. Please note that because the panel operates under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, all written comments will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection.

Verbal Comments: Members of the public will be permitted to make verbal comments during the meeting only at the time and in the manner allowed herein. If a member of the public is interested in making a verbal comment at the open meeting, that individual must submit a request, with a brief statement of the subject matter to be addressed by the comment, at least three (3) business days in advance to the committee DFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the email address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The committee DFO will log each request to make a comment, in the order received, and determine whether the subject matter of each comment is relevant to the panel's mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this public meeting. A 30-minute period near the end of the meeting will be available for verbal public comments. Members of the public who have requested to make a verbal comment and whose comments have been deemed relevant under the process described in this paragraph, will be allotted no more than five (5) minutes during this period, and will be invited to speak in the order in which their requests were received by the DFO.

Section 7001 of WRRDA 2014 requires the publication of a notice in the Federal Register to request proposals by non-Federal interests for feasibility studies and modifications to an authorized USACE water resources development project or feasibility study. Project feasibility reports that have successfully completed Executive Branch review, but have not been authorized will be included in the Annual Report table by the Secretary of the Army and these proposals do not need to be submitted in response to this notice.

Proposals by non-Federal interests must be entered online and require the following information:

1. The name of all non-Federal interests planning to act as the sponsor, including any non-Federal interest that has contributed to or is expected to contribute toward the non-Federal share of the proposed feasibility study or modification.

2. State if this proposal is for a feasibility study or a modification to an authorized USACE water resources development project or feasibility study and, if a modification, specify the authorized water resources development project or study that is proposed for modification.

3. State the specific project purpose(s) of the proposed study or modification.

4. Provide an estimate, to the extent practicable, of the total cost, and the Federal and non-Federal share of those costs, of the proposed study and, separately, an estimate of the cost of construction or modification.

5. Describe, to the extent applicable and practicable, an estimate of the anticipated monetary and non-monetary benefits of the proposal with regard to benefits to the protection of human life and property; improvement to transportation; the national economy; the environment; or the national security interests of the United States.

6. Describe if local support exists for the proposal.

7. State if the non-Federal interest has the financial ability to provide the required cost share, reference ER 1105-2-100.

8. Upload a letter or statement of support from each associated non-Federal interest.

All provided information may be included in the Annual Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development. Therefore, information that is Confidential Business Information, information that should not be disclosed because of statutory restrictions, or other information that a non-Federal interest would not want to appear in the Annual Report should not be included.

Process: Proposals received within the time frame set forth in this notice will be reviewed by the Army and will be presented in one of two tables. The first table will be in the Annual Report itself, and the second table will be in an appendix. To be included in the Annual Report table, the proposals must meet the following criteria:

1. Are related to the missions and authorities of the USACE;

Involves a proposed or existing USACE water resources project or effort whose primary purpose is flood and storm damage reduction, commercial navigation, or aquatic ecosystem restoration. Following long-standing USACE practice, related proposals such as for recreation, hydropower, or water supply, are eligible for inclusion if undertaken in conjunction with such a project or effort.

2. Require specific congressional authorization, including by an Act of Congress;

Comprise the following cases:

a. REQUIRES CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION.

• Signed Chief's Reports

• Non-Federal feasibility reports submitted to the Secretary of the Army under Section 203 of WRDA 1986, as amended, under Administration review,

• Ongoing feasibility studies that are expected to result in a Chief's Report, and

• Proposed modifications to environmental infrastructure projects that were authorized prior to the date of enactment of the Water Resources Development Act of 2016 (December 16, 2016); and

• Proposed modifications to authorized water resources development projects requested by non-Federal interests through the Section 7001 of WRRDA 2014 process.

b. SEEKING STUDY AUTHORIZATION.

• New feasibility studies proposed by non-Federal interests through the Section 7001 of WRRDA 2014 process will be evaluated by the USACE to determine whether or not there is existing study authority, and

• Proposed modifications to studies requested by non-Federal interests through the Section 7001 of WRRDA 2014 process will be evaluated by the USACE to determine whether or not there is existing study authority.

c. The following cases are NOT ELIGIBLE to be included in the Annual Report and will be included in the appendix for transparency:

• Proposals for modifications to non-Federal projects where USACE has provided previous technical assistance. Authorization to provide technical assistance does not provide authorization of a water resources development project.

• Proposals for construction of a new water resources development project that is not the subject of a currently authorized USACE project or a complete or ongoing feasibility study.

• Proposals that do not include a request for a potential future water resources development project through completed feasibility reports, proposed feasibility studies, and proposed modifications to authorized projects or studies.

3. Have not been congressionally authorized;

4. Have not been included in the Annual Report table of any previous Annual Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development; and

• If the proposal was included in the Annual Report table in a previous Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development, then the proposal is not eligible to be included in the Annual Report table. If a proposal was previously included in an appendix it may be re-submitted.

5. If authorized, could be carried out by the USACE.

• Whether following the USACE Chief's Report process or Section 7001 of WRRDA 2014, a proposal for a project or a project modification would need a current decision document to provide updated information on the scope of the potential project and demonstrate a clear Federal interest. This determination would include an assessment of whether the proposal is:

Feasibility study proposals submitted by non-Federal interests are for the study only. If Congressional authorization of a feasibility study results from inclusion in the Annual Report, it is anticipated that such authorization would be for the study, not for construction. Once a decision document is completed in accordance with Executive Branch policies and procedures, the Secretary will determine whether to recommend the project for authorization.

All water resources development projects must meet certain requirements before proceeding to construction. These requirements include: (1) That the project is authorized for construction by Congress; (2) that the Secretary, or other appropriate official, has approved a current decision document; and, (3) that the funds for project construction have been appropriated and are available.

Section 902 of WRDA 1986 establishes a maximum authorized cost for projects (902 limit). A Post Authorization Change Report (PACR) is required to be completed to support potential modifications, updates to project costs, and an increase to the 902 limit. Authority to undertake a 902 study is inherent in the project authority, so no authority is required to proceed with the study. Since these PACRs support project modifications, they may be considered for inclusion in the Annual Report if a report's recommendation requires Congressional authorization.

The Secretary shall include in the Annual Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development a certification stating that each feasibility report, proposed feasibility study, and proposed modification to an authorized water resources development project or feasibility study included in the Annual Report meets the criteria established in Section 7001 of WRRDA 2014.

Please contact the appropriate district office or use the contact information above for assistance in researching and identifying existing authorizations and existing USACE decision documents. Those proposals that do not meet the criteria will be included in an appendix table included in the Annual Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development. Proposals in the appendix table will include a description of why those proposals did not meet the criteria.

Title: FERC Form No. 2 (Annual Report of Major Natural Gas Companies) & FERC Form No. 2A (Annual Report of Non-major Natural Gas Companies).1

OMB Control No.: 1902-0028 (FERC Form No. 2) and 1902-0030 (FERC Form No. 2A).

Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC Form No. 2 and FERC Form No. 2A information collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting requirements.

Abstract: Pursuant to sections 8, 10 and 14 of the National Gas Act (NGA), (15 U.S.C. 717g-717m, Pub. L. 75-688), the Commission is authorized to make investigations and collect and record data, to prescribe rules and regulations concerning accounts, records and memoranda as necessary or appropriate for purposes of administering the NGA. The Commission includes the filing requirements in 18 CFR parts 260.1 and 260.2.

The forms provide information concerning a company's past performance. The information is compiled using a standard chart of accounts contained in the Commission's Uniform System of Accounts (USofA).2 The forms contain schedules which include a basic set of financial statements: Comparative Balance Sheet, Statement of Income and Retained Earnings, Statement of Cash Flows, and the Statement of Comprehensive Income and Hedging Activities. Supporting schedules containing supplementary information are filed, including revenues and the related quantities of products sold or transported; account balances for various operating and maintenance expenses; selected plant cost data; and other information.

The information collected in the forms is used by Commission staff, state regulatory agencies and others in the review of the financial condition of regulated companies. The information is also used in various rate proceedings, industry analyses and in the Commission's audit programs and, as appropriate, for the computation of annual charges based on Page 520 of the forms. The Commission provides the information to the public, interveners and all interested parties to assist in the proceedings before the Commission.

Print versions of the Forms No. 2 and 2A are located on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/forms.asp#2.

Type of Respondent: Each natural gas company whose combined gas transported or stored for a fee exceed 50 million dekatherms in each of the previous three years must file the Form 2. Each natural gas company not meeting the filing threshold for the Form 2 but having total gas sales or volume transactions exceeding 200,000 dekatherms in each of the previous three calendar years must submit the Form 2A.

Estimate of Annual Burden: 3 The Commission estimates the annual public reporting burden for the information collection as:

Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Final approval under OMB delegated authority of the extension for three years, without revision, of the following report:

Report title: Registration of Mortgage Loan Originators.

Agency form number: CFPB Reg G.

OMB control number: 7100-0328.

Frequency: Annually.

Respondents : Employees of state member banks, certain subsidiaries of state member banks, branches and agencies of foreign banks that are regulated by the Federal Reserve, and commercial lending companies of foreign banks who act as residential mortgage loan originators (MLOs).

Estimated number of respondents: MLOs (new): Initial set up and disclosure, 173 respondents; MLOs (existing): Maintenance and disclosure, 21,656 respondents; MLOs (existing): Updates for changes, 10,828 respondents; and Depository Institutions, and subsidiaries, 741 respondents.

Estimated average hours per response: MLOs (new): Initial set up and disclosure, 3.5 hours; MLOs (existing): Maintenance and disclosure, 0.85 hours; MLOs (existing): Updates for changes, 0.25 hours; and Depository Institutions, and subsidiaries, 118 hours.

Estimated annual burden hours: MLOs (new): Initial set up and disclosure, 606 hours; MLOs (existing): Maintenance and disclosure, 18,408 hours; MLOs (existing): Updates for changes, 2,707 hours; and Depository Institutions, and subsidiaries, 87,438 hours.

General Description of Report: In accordance with the Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act (S.A.F.E. Act), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) Regulation G requires residential mortgage loan originators (MLOs) to register with the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry (the Registry), obtain a unique identifier, maintain this registration, and disclose to consumers upon request and through the Registry their unique identifier and the MLO's employment history and publicly adjudicated disciplinary and enforcement actions. The CFPB's regulation also requires the institutions employing these MLOs to adopt and follow written policies and procedures to ensure their employees comply with these requirements and to conduct annual independent compliance tests to assure compliance. The CFPB's rule applies to a broad range of financial institutions and their employees, including Board-supervised institutions/employees, such as state member banks and their non-functionally-regulated subsidiaries, state uninsured branches and agencies of foreign banks, and commercial lending companies owned or controlled by foreign banks.

Legal authorization and confidentiality: The Board's Legal Division has determined that Section 1507 of the S.A.F.E. Act, 12 U.S.C. 5106, requires that the CFPB develop and maintain a system for registering individual MLOs of covered financial institutions regulated by a federal banking agency with the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry. Section 1504 of the S.A.F.E. Act, (12 U.S.C. 5103), requires that an individual desiring to engage in the business of a loan originator maintain an annual federal registration (or be licensed by an equivalent state regulatory scheme) and appear on the Registry with a unique identifier. Section 1007.103 of the CFPB's Regulation G implements this registration scheme; Section 1007.104 requires the adoption of appropriate policies and procedures by covered financial institutions; and Section 1007.105 requires that covered financial institutions provide the unique identifiers of MLOs to consumers. (12 CFR 1007.103-.105). Under Section 1061 of the Dodd-Frank Act, (12 U.S.C. 5581©), “a transferor agency [such as the Board] that is a prudential regulator shall have . . . “authority to require reports from . . . conduct examinations for . . . and enforce compliance with Federal consumer financial laws” with respect to the Board-supervised entities enumerated above. Therefore, the Board is authorized to collect this information with respect to the institutions we supervise for this purpose. This information collection is mandatory.

As noted above, the unique identifier of MLOs must be made public and is not considered confidential. In addition, most of the information that MLOs submit in order to register with the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry will be publicly available. However, certain identifying data about individuals who act as MLOs are entitled to confidential treatment under (b)(6) of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which protects from disclosure information that “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(6)).

With respect to the information collection requirements imposed on depository institutions, because the requirements require that depository institutions retain their own records and make certain disclosures to customers, the FOIA would only be implicated if the Board's examiners obtained a copy of these records as part of the examination or supervision process of a financial institution. However, records obtained in this manner are exempt from disclosure under FOIA exemption (b)(8), regarding examination-related materials. (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(8)).

Current Actions: On January 10, 2017 the Federal Reserve published a notice in the Federal Register (82 FR 2995) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, without revision, of the Registration of Mortgage Loan Originators. The comment period for this notice expired on March 13, 2017. The Federal Reserve did not receive any comments.

Proposed Project AHRQ Research Reporting System (ARRS)

AHRQ has developed a systematic method for its grantees and vendors to report project progress and important preliminary findings for grants and contracts funded by the Agency. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521, AHRQ invites the public to comment on this proposed information collection. This system, the AHRQ Research Reporting System (ARRS), previously known as the Grants Reporting System (GRS), was last approved by OMB on May 16, 2014. The system addressed the shortfalls in the previous reporting process and established a consistent and comprehensive grants reporting solution for AHRQ. The ARRS provides a centralized repository of grants and contract research progress and additional information that can be used to support initiatives within the Agency. This includes future research planning and support for administrative activities such as performance monitoring, budgeting, knowledge transfer and strategic planning.

This project has the following goals:

(1) To promote the transfer of critical information more frequently and efficiently and enhance the Agency's ability to support research designed to improve the outcomes and quality of health care, reduce its costs, and broaden access to effective services.

(2) To increase the efficiency of the Agency in responding to ad-hoc information requests.

(3) To support Executive Branch requirements for increased transparency and public reporting.

(4) To establish a consistent approach throughout the Agency for information collection regarding grant and contract progress and a systematic basis for oversight and for facilitating potential collaborations among grantees.

(5) To decrease the inconvenience and burden on grantees and vendors of unanticipated ad-hoc requests for information by the Agency in response to particular one-time internal and external requests for information.

This study is being conducted by AHRQ pursuant to AHRQ's statutory authority to conduct and support research on health care and on systems for the delivery of such care, including activities with respect to the quality, effectiveness, efficiency, appropriateness and value of healthcare services and with respect to quality measurement and improvement. 42 U.S.C. 299a(a)(1) and (2).

To achieve the goals of this project, the following data collections will be implemented:

AHRQ Research Reporting System (ARRS)—Grantees and vendors use the ARRS system to report project progress and important preliminary findings for grants and contracts funded by the Agency. Grantees and vendors submit progress reports on a monthly or quarterly basis which are reviewed by AHRQ personnel. All users access the ARRS system through a secure online interface which requires a user I.D. and password entered through the ARRS login screen. When status reports are due AHRQ notifies principal investigators and vendors via email.

The ARRS is an automated, user-friendly resource that is utilized by AHRQ staff for preparing, distributing, and reviewing reporting requests to grantees and vendors for the purpose of information sharing. AHRQ personnel are able to systematically search the information collected and stored in the ARRS database. Personnel will also use the information to address internal and/or external requests for information regarding grant progress, preliminary findings, and other requests, such as Freedom of Information Act requests and producing responses related to federally mandated programs and regulations.

Exhibit 1 shows the estimated annualized burden hours for the respondents. It will take grantees and vendors an estimated 10 minutes to enter the necessary data into the ARRS System and reporting will occur four times annually. The total annualized burden hours are estimated to be 333 hours.

Exhibit 2 shows the estimated annualized cost burden for the respondents. The total estimated cost burden for respondents is $12,454.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on AHRQ's information collection are requested with regard to any of the following: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of AHRQ health care research and health care information dissemination functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of AHRQ's estimate of burden (including hours and costs) of the proposed collection(s) of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information upon the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the Agency's subsequent request for OMB approval of the proposed information collection. All comments will become a matter of public record.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality has commissioned the Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPC) Program to complete a review of the evidence for Systematic Review of Breastfeeding Programs and Policies, Breastfeeding Uptake, and Maternal Health Outcomes in Developed Countries. AHRQ is conducting this systematic review pursuant to Section 902(a) of the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 299a(a).

The EPC Program is dedicated to identifying as many studies as possible that are relevant to the questions for each of its reviews. In order to do so, we are supplementing the usual manual and electronic database searches of the literature by requesting information from the public (e.g., details of studies conducted). We are looking for studies that report on Systematic Review of Breastfeeding Programs and Policies, Breastfeeding Uptake, and Maternal Health Outcomes in Developed Countries, including those that describe adverse events. The entire research protocol, including the key questions, is also available online at: https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/search-for-guides-reviews-and-reports/?pageaction=displayproduct&productID=2455

This is to notify the public that the EPC Program would find the following information on Systematic Review of Breastfeeding Programs and Policies, Breastfeeding Uptake, and Maternal Health Outcomes in Developed Countries helpful:

A list of completed studies that your organization has sponsored for this indication. In the list, please indicate whether results are available on ClinicalTrials.gov along with the ClinicalTrials.gov trial number.

For completed studies that do not have results on ClinicalTrials.gov, please provide a summary, including the following elements: Study number, study period, design, methodology, indication and diagnosis, proper use instructions, inclusion and exclusion criteria, primary and secondary outcomes, baseline characteristics, number of patients screened/eligible/enrolled/lost to follow-up/withdrawn/analyzed, effectiveness/efficacy, and safety results.

A list of ongoing studies that your organization has sponsored for this indication. In the list, please provide the ClinicalTrials.gov trial number or, if the trial is not registered, the protocol for the study including a study number, the study period, design, methodology, indication and diagnosis, proper use instructions, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and primary and secondary outcomes.

Description of whether the above studies constitute ALL Phase II and above clinical trials sponsored by your organization for this indication and an index outlining the relevant information in each submitted file.

Your contribution will be very beneficial to the EPC Program. The contents of all submissions will be made available to the public upon request. Materials submitted must be publicly available or able to be made public. Materials that are considered confidential; marketing materials; study types not included in the review; or information on indications not included in the review cannot be used by the EPC Program. This is a voluntary request for information, and all costs for complying with this request must be borne by the submitter.

The draft of this review will be posted on AHRQ's EPC Program Web site and available for public comment for a period of 4 weeks. If you would like to be notified when the draft is posted, please sign up for the email list at: https://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/index.cfm/join-the-email-list1/.

The systematic review will answer the following questions. This information is provided as background. AHRQ is not requesting that the public provide answers to these questions.

KQ 1a. What is the effectiveness and harms of programs and policies on initiation, duration, and exclusivity of breastfeeding?

KQ 1b. To what extent do the effectiveness and harms of programs and policies on initiation, duration, and exclusivity of breastfeeding differ for subpopulations of women defined by sociodemographic factors (e.g., age, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status)?

KQ 1c. To what extent do intervention-related characteristics (e.g., type of breast pump provided—manual or electric; delivery personnel) influence the initiation, duration, and exclusivity of breast feeding?

KQ 2a. What are the comparative benefits and harms for maternal health outcomes among women who breastfeed for different intensities and durations?

KQ 2b. To what extent do benefits and harms for maternal health outcomes differ for subpopulations of women defined by age, race, ethnicity, and comorbidity?

KQs 1, 2: Childbearing women and adolescents; we will also search for evidence on subgroups of women defined by age, race, ethnicity, comorbidity, and socioeconomic status (including insurance status and payer type).

KQ 1: Community, workplace, and health care system-based interventions aimed at promoting and supporting breastfeeding, including the following: Health plan benefits, state and federal policies or programs (e.g., WIC programs), hospital implementation of the BFHI, workplace or school-based programs, and others. For studies assessing the effectiveness of BFHI, we will include studies evaluating full and partial implementation (at least 3 steps) of the 10 steps.

KQ 2: Exposure to breastfeeding.

KQ 1: No intervention (or usual practice); comparisons of two interventions that differ in content or intensity.

KQ 2: No breastfeeding; shorter duration of breastfeeding (e.g., breastfeeding for 1 month vs. 12 months) and/or less intensive breastfeeding (e.g., exclusive breastfeeding vs. mixed feeding or formula feeding).

KQ 1: Rates of breastfeeding initiation; duration and exclusivity of breastfeeding, adverse effects of interventions (e.g., guilt about not breastfeeding, workplace discrimination, and other reported harms).

KQ 2: Postpartum depression, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, osteoporosis, cardiovascular outcomes (e.g., stroke, myocardial infarction), postpartum weight change, type 2 diabetes, hypertension.

KQs 1, 2: We will have no minimum study duration or length of follow up.

KQs 1, 2: Studies conducted in a developed country [“very high” (KQs 1, 2) and “high” (KQ 1) human development index per the United Nations Development Programme 40.

KQ 1: Randomized and non-randomized controlled clinical trials; prospective cohort studies with concurrent control groups; systematic reviews; for studies assessing policy or system-level interventions, we will also include pre-post studies with repeated outcome measures before and after the intervention.

KQ 2: Randomized and non-randomized controlled clinical trials; cohort studies; case-control studies; systematic reviews.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality has commissioned the Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPC) Program to complete a review of the evidence for Lower Limb Prosthesis (LLP). AHRQ is conducting this systematic review pursuant to Section 902(a) of the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 299a(a).

The EPC Program is dedicated to identifying as many studies as possible that are relevant to the questions for each of its reviews. In order to do so, we are supplementing the usual manual and electronic database searches of the literature by requesting information from the public (e.g., details of studies conducted). We are looking for studies that report on Lower Limb Prosthesis, including those that describe adverse events. The entire research protocol, including the key questions, is also available online at: https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/search-for-guides-reviews-and-reports/?pageaction=displayproduct&productID=2451

This is to notify the public that the EPC Program would find the following information on Lower Limb Prosthesis helpful:

A list of completed studies that your organization has sponsored for this indication. In the list, please indicate whether results are available on ClinicalTrials.gov along with the ClinicalTrials.gov trial number.

For completed studies that do not have results on ClinicalTrials.gov, please provide a summary, including the following elements: study number, study period, design, methodology, indication and diagnosis, proper use instructions, inclusion and exclusion criteria, primary and secondary outcomes, baseline characteristics, number of patients screened/eligible/enrolled/lost to follow-up/withdrawn/analyzed, effectiveness/efficacy, and safety results.

A list of ongoing studies that your organization has sponsored for this indication. In the list, please provide the ClinicalTrials.gov trial number or, if the trial is not registered, the protocol for the study including a study number, the study period, design, methodology, indication and diagnosis, proper use instructions, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and primary and secondary outcomes.

Description of whether the above studies constitute ALL Phase II and above clinical trials sponsored by your organization for this indication and an index outlining the relevant information in each submitted file.

Your contribution will be very beneficial to the EPC Program. The contents of all submissions will be made available to the public upon request. Materials submitted must be publicly available or able to be made public. Materials that are considered confidential; marketing materials; study types not included in the review; or information on indications not included in the review cannot be used by the EPC Program. This is a voluntary request for information, and all costs for complying with this request must be borne by the submitter.

The draft of this review will be posted on AHRQ's EPC Program Web site and available for public comment for a period of 4 weeks. If you would like to be notified when the draft is posted, please sign up for the email list at: https://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/index.cfm/join-the-email-list1/.

The systematic review will answer the following questions. This information is provided as background. AHRQ is not requesting that the public provide answers to these questions.

What assessment techniques used to measure functional ability of adults with major lower limb amputation have been evaluated in the published literature?

I. What are the measurement properties of these techniques, including: Reliability, validity, responsiveness, minimal detectable change, and minimal important difference?

II. What are the characteristics of the participants in studies evaluating measurement properties of assessment techniques?

What prediction tools used to predict functional outcomes in adults with major lower limb amputation have been evaluated in the published literature?

I. What are their characteristics, including technical quality (reliability, validity, responsiveness), minimal detectable change, and minimal important difference?

II. What are the characteristics of the participants in these studies?

What functional outcome measurement tools used to assess adults who use a lower limb prosthesis (LLP) have been evaluated in the published literature?

I. What are their characteristics, including technical quality (reliability, validity, responsiveness), minimal detectable change, and minimal important difference?

II. What are the characteristics of the participants in these studies?

In adults who use an LLP, how do the relative effects on ambulatory, functional, and patient-centered outcomes of different prosthetic components or levels of components/prostheses vary based on study participant characteristics?

Prosthetic components include: Foot/ankle; knee; socket; liner; suspension; pylon; other.

Study participant characteristics of interest include: K level; level of amputation; etiology of amputation; prior function (prior to new or replacement LLP); current function; expected potential function/level of activity and activities (e.g., athletics, uneven surface walking); time since amputation; initial vs. subsequent limb LLP; unilateral vs bilateral LLP; time since last assessment; age; comorbidities that may affect use of LLP (e.g., congestive heart failure, vascular dysfunction, skin ulceration/damage, visual dysfunction, peripheral neuropathy, local cancer treatment, other lower limb disease); type, setting, and description of rehabilitation, physical therapy, training; peri-amputation surgery information, including surgical details, inpatient rehabilitation details, wound status; residence setting; use of assistive devices; comfort of existing prosthesis (for patients receiving replacement LLP); psychosocial characteristics; family (etc.) support system; training and acclimation with LLP.

I. What assessment techniques that have been evaluated for measurement properties were used in these studies?

A. How do the characteristics of the participants in eligible studies that used these specific assessment techniques compare to the characteristics of the participants in the studies that evaluated the assessment techniques (as per Key Question 1II)?

B. What is the association between these pre-prescription assessment techniques and validated outcomes with the LLP in these studies?

II. What prediction tools that have been evaluated for measurement properties were used in these studies?

A. How do the characteristics of the participants in eligible studies that used these specific prediction tools compare to the characteristics of the participants in the studies that evaluated the prediction tools (as per Key Question 2II)?

B. What is the association between pre-prescription assessment techniques and validated outcomes with the LLP in these studies?

III. What functional outcomes that have been for measurement properties were used in these studies?

A. How do the characteristics of the participants in eligible studies that used these specific functional outcomes compare to the characteristics of the participants in the studies that evaluated the outcomes (as per Key Question 3II)?

How do the patients' pre-prescription expectations of ambulation align with their functional outcomes?

I. How does the level of agreement vary based on the characteristics listed in Key Question 4, including level of componentry incorporated into their LLP?

What is the level of patient satisfaction with the process of accessing a LLP (including experiences with both providers and payers)?

I. How does the level of patient satisfaction vary based on the characteristics listed in Key Question 4, including level of componentry incorporated into their LLP?

At 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years after receipt of a LLP, (accounting for intervening mortality, subsequent surgeries or injuries) what percentage of individuals maintain bipedal ambulation; use their prostheses only for transfers; are housebound vs. ambulating in community; have abandoned their prostheses; have major problems with prosthesis.

I. How do these percentages vary based on the following characteristics?

II. What were the reasons for suboptimal use of the prosthetic device?

On August 15, 2016, NIOSH published a notice of public web meeting and request for comments on the “NIOSH Center for Motor Vehicle Safety: Midcourse Review of Strategic Plan” in the Federal Register [81 FR 54094]. The purpose of this midcourse review was to seek external input via public comments and invited stakeholder reviews to shape priorities for the NIOSH Center for Motor Vehicle Safety for the next 2 years and proceeding toward developing a new 10-year strategic plan. All comments received were reviewed and considered in finalizing the current document. Comments for Docket 270-A can be found at: https://www.regulations.gov/Docket No. CDC-2016-0067.

When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the information request collection title for reference, in compliance with section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

Information Collection Request Title: Rural Health Network Development Planning Performance Improvement and Measurement System Database.

OMB No. 0915-0384—Extension.

Abstract: The purpose of the Rural Health Network Development Planning Program (Network Planning) is to assist in the development of an integrated health care network, specifically for entities that do not have a history of formal collaborative efforts. Health care networks can be an effective strategy to help smaller rural health care providers and health care service organizations align resources, achieve economies of scale and efficiency, and address challenges more effectively as a group than as single providers. This program promotes the planning and development of healthcare networks in order to: (1) achieve efficiencies; (2) expand access to, coordinate, and improve the quality of essential health care services; and (3) strengthen the rural health care system as a whole.

The goals of the Network Planning program are centered around approaches that will aid providers in better serving their communities given the changes taking place in health care, as providers move from focusing on the volume of services to focusing on the value of services. The Network Planning program brings together key parts of a rural health care delivery system, particularly those entities that may not have collaborated in the past under a formal relationship, to establish and improve local capacity and coordination of care. The program supports 1 year of planning with the primary goal of helping networks create a foundation for their infrastructure and focusing member efforts to address important regional or local community health needs.

Need and Proposed Use of the Information: Performance measures for the Network Planning program serve the purpose of quantifying awardee-level data that conveys the successes and challenges associated with the grant award. The approved measures encompass the following principal topic areas: network infrastructure, network collaboration, sustainability, and network assessment.

Likely Respondents: The respondents for these measures are Network Planning program award recipients.

Burden Statement: Burden in this context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide the information requested. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The total annual burden hours estimated for this ICR are summarized in the table below. As no revisions are proposed, the burden does not change.

Total Estimated Annualized Burden Hours:

HRSA specifically requests comments on (1) the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden, (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the information request collection title for reference, in compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

Information Collection Request Title: NURSE Corps Loan Repayment Program OMB No. 0915-0140—Revision.

Abstract: The NURSE Corps Loan Repayment Program (NURSE Corps LRP) assists in the recruitment and retention of professional Registered Nurses (RNs), including advanced practice RNs (e.g., nurse practitioners, certified registered nurse anesthetists, certified nurse-midwives, clinical nurse specialists), dedicated to working at eligible health care facilities with a critical shortage of nurses (e.g., a Critical Shortage Facility) or working as nurse faculty in eligible, accredited schools of nursing, by decreasing the financial barriers associated with pursuing a nursing profession. The NURSE Corps LRP provides loan repayment assistance to these nurses to repay a portion of their qualifying educational loans in exchange for full-time service at a public or private nonprofit Critical Shortage Facility or in an eligible, accredited school of nursing.

Need and Proposed Use of the Information: The information is used to consider an applicant for a NURSE Corps LRP contract award and to monitor a participant's compliance with the service requirements. Individuals must submit an application to participate in the program. The application asks for personal, professional, educational, and financial information required to determine the applicant's eligibility to participate in the NURSE Corps LRP. The semi-annual employment verification form asks for personal and employment information to determine if a participant is in compliance with the service requirements. The Authorization to Release Employment Information form has been revised as a self-certification within the NURSE Corps LRP application process, with applicants clicking a box. This contributes to a decrease in the overall burden by 550 hours.

Likely Respondents: Professional RNs or advanced practice RNs who are interested in participating in the NURSE Corps LRP, and official representatives at their service sites.

Burden Statement: Burden in this context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide the information requested. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The total annual burden hours estimated for this ICR are summarized in the table below.

Total Estimated Annualized Burden Hours:

The estimates of reporting burden for applicants are as follows:

The estimates of reporting burden for participants are as follows:

Notice of this meeting is in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Title 5 United States Code Appendix. The National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee provides advice and recommendations to the Department of Homeland Security on matters and actions concerning activities directly involved with or in support of the exploration of offshore mineral and energy resources insofar as they relate to matters within United States Coast Guard jurisdiction.

A copy of all meeting documentation will be available at https://homeport.uscg.mil/nosac no later than April 16, 2017. Alternatively, you may contact Mr. Patrick Clark as noted in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

The National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee's Subcommittee on “Safety Management Systems on Vessels Engaging in Well Intervention Activities” will meet on May 16, 2017 from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. to review, discuss, and formulate recommendations.

The National Offshore Safety Advisory full Committee will hold a public meeting on May 17, 2017 from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. (Central Daylight Time) to review and discuss the progress of, and any reports and recommendations received from, the above listed Subcommittee from their deliberations on May 16, 2017. The Committee will then use this information and consider public comments in formulating recommendations to the United States Coast Guard. Public comments or questions will be taken at the discretion of the Designated Federal Officer during the discussion and recommendation portions of the meeting and during the public comment period, see Agenda item (8).

A complete agenda for May 17, 2017 Committee meeting is as follows:

(1) Welcoming remarks.

(2) General Administration and accept minutes from February 21, 2017 National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee public teleconference meeting.

(3) Installation of new members.

(4) Installation of new Committee Chair.

(5) Current Business—Presentation and discussion of progress from the Subcommittee on Safety Management Systems on Vessels Engaging in Well Intervention Activities.

(6) New Business.

(7) Presentations on the following matters:

(a) “The Internet of Things” and how digital engineering can transform the safety and operability of equipment used by the oil and gas industry;

(b) United States Coast Guard Cyber Security Initiatives update;

(c) Update from the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement;

(d) Eighth Coast Guard District Officer in Charge Marine Inspection Outer Continental Shelf Inspection Program Updates.

(8) Public comment period.

Meeting minutes from this public meeting will be available for public view and copying within 90 days following the close of the meeting at the https://homeport.uscg.mil/nosac Web site.

FEMA proposes to make flood hazard determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).

These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional information regarding the SRP process can be found online at http://floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_fact_sheet.pdf.

The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

I. Non-watershed-based studies:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final determinations listed below for the new or modified flood hazard information for each community listed. Notification of these changes has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.

This final notice is issued in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has developed criteria for floodplain management in floodprone areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60.

Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the new or revised FIRM and FIS report available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

The flood hazard determinations are made final in the watersheds and/or communities listed in the table below.

I. Non-watershed-based studies:

Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated March 21, 2017, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”), as follows:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Nancy M. Casper, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.

The following areas of the State of Wyoming have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final determinations listed below for the new or modified flood hazard information for each community listed. Notification of these changes has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.

This final notice is issued in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has developed criteria for floodplain management in floodprone areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60.

Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the new or revised FIRM and FIS report available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

The flood hazard determinations are made final in the watersheds and/or communities listed in the table below.

I. Non-watershed-based studies:

FEMA proposes to make flood hazard determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).

These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional information regarding the SRP process can be found online at http://floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_fact_sheet.pdf.

The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

I. Watershed-based studies:

II. Non-watershed-based studies:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Jerry S. Thomas, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

This action terminates the appointment of William J. Doran III as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

Background

The Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Russian Federation on the Conservation and Management of the Alaska-Chukotka Polar Bear Population (2000 Agreement), signed in 2000 and ratified by the United States in 2007, provides legal protections for the population of polar bears found in the Chukchi and Northern Bering Seas. The 2000 Agreement is implemented in the United States through Title V of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and builds upon the protections provided to this population of polar bears through the Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears (1973 Agreement), which was a significant early step in the international conservation of polar bears. The 1973 Agreement is a multilateral treaty to which the United States and Russia are parties with other polar bear range states—Norway, Canada, and Denmark (on behalf of Greenland). While the 1973 Agreement provides authority for the maintenance of a subsistence harvest of polar bears and provides for habitat conservation, the 2000 Agreement establishes a common legal, scientific, and administrative framework directed specifically for the conservation and management of the Alaska-Chukotka polar bear population.

As a shared population, polar bears within the Alaska-Chukotka population readily move between the United States and Russian Federation. Article 3 of the 2000 Agreement defines the geographic boundaries of the Agreement, which correspond to the areas within the jurisdiction of the United States and Russian Federation in which the joint polar bear population may be found. Under Article 3, the geographic boundaries of the 2000 Agreement are “bounded on the west by a line extending north from the mouth of the Kolyma River; on the east by a line extending north from Point Barrow; and on the south by a line describing the southernmost annual formation of drift ice.” Thus, the 2000 Agreement recognizes the need for a unified, common management regime to provide for the long-term sustainability of this shared population, while assisting in safeguarding the social, cultural, and subsistence needs of Alaska Natives and native people of Chukotka. For example, the 2000 Agreement requires the Commission, the bilateral authority established under the 2000 Agreement, to determine a “sustainable harvest level” that is based upon reliable scientific information, does not exceed net annual recruitment to the population, and maintains the population at or near its current level.

Article 8 of the 2000 Agreement sets forth the composition and responsibilities of the Commission. The Commission includes a U.S. section and Russian section, with each national section comprising two members appointed by their respective parties to provide for the inclusion of a member representing the country's native people in addition to a Federal representative. Under the 2000 Agreement, each section has one vote, and all decisions of the Commission may be made only with the approval of both sections. Among other duties under Article 8, the Commission must promote cooperation among the parties and the native people, make scientific determinations, establish annual taking limits, and adopt other restrictions on take of polar bears for subsistence purposes within the framework of the established annual taking limits. Article 8 further requires the establishment of a Scientific Working Group (SWG) to advise the Commission on its decisions.

At its first annual meeting, held in Moscow, Russia, September 23-25, 2009, the Commission identified members of the SWG and tasked the SWG with reviewing the current level of take of polar bears and providing recommendations to the Commission on the sustainable harvest level. Recommendations from the SWG help guide the research necessary to address present and future polar bear conservation issues in the shared Alaska-Chukotka polar bear population.

The second annual meeting of the Commission took place June 7-10, 2010, in Anchorage, Alaska. During this meeting the Commission reviewed the recommendations of the SWG and, consistent with the SWG's recommendation, determined that establishing a limit to the total allowable take, including subsistence harvest, of polar bears from the Alaska-Chukotka polar bear population was needed. Thus, consistent with the 2000 Agreement, the Commission adopted an annual taking limit that corresponds with, but does not exceed, the sustainable harvest level of no more than 58 polar bears per year, of which no more than 19 animals may be females, that may be removed from the Alaska-Chukotka polar bear population. The Commission determined that all forms of human-caused removal of individuals from the Alaska-Chukotka polar bear population will be incorporated in this annual taking limit (75 FR 65507; October 25, 2010). Under Section 502(a)(2) of the MMPA, it is unlawful to take any polar bear from the Alaska-Chukotka population in violation of this annual taking limit adopted by the Commission. At its third annual meeting, in 2011, the Commission made no change to the take limit established in 2010.

At its fourth annual meeting, held June 25-27, 2012, in Anchorage, Alaska, the Commission adopted a multiyear quota system that would allow the Commission to set a sustainable harvest level for a 5-year timeframe, and within the 5-year cycle, adjust the annual taking limit upward or downward depending on the actual harvest of bears the preceding year. For example, if harvest was above the annual taking limit in one year, which would constitute a violation of the 2000 Agreement and Title V of the MMPA, the annual taking limit could be reduced by the Commission for subsequent years. Alternatively, if ice conditions or other factors limit hunters' abilities to harvest polar bears in one year, the Commission could increase the annual taking limit in subsequent years, as long as the sustainable harvest level over a 5-year period is not exceeded.

Therefore, in 2012, based on the recommendation of the SWG, the Commission agreed upon a 5-year sustainable harvest level of 290 polar bears (i.e., the annual sustainable harvest level of 58 bears × 5 years), with no more than one-third being female. Under this multiyear quota system, the 5-year sustainable harvest level would be allocated over a 5-year period and would include the identification of annual sustainable harvest levels for consideration by the Commission in setting annual taking limits. The Commission, at each of its subsequent annual meetings held in 2013, 2014, and 2015, was advised by the SWG that new biological information considered at the meeting did not suggest the need to change the sustainable harvest level established by the Commission. The Commission, therefore, at each of those meetings in 2013, 2014, and 2015 adopted the SWG's recommendation that no change be made to the existing sustainable harvest level of up to 58 polar bears per year to be shared equally between the United States and Russia, of which no more than one-third will be female.

At the eighth annual meeting of the Commission, held November 17-18, 2016, in Anchorage, Alaska, the SWG recognized that new biological information considered at the meeting did not suggest the need to change the sustainable harvest level established by the Commission and, therefore, it recommended no change to the current annual sustainable harvest level of 58 polar bears per year to be shared equally between the United States and the Russian Federation, of which no more than one-third will be female, or to the multiyear quota system previously adopted by the Commission. The Commission unanimously adopted this recommendation. Additionally, the U.S. Commissioners discussed their collaborative efforts over the past year to lay the foundation for effective implementation of the annual taking limit, and expressed their commitment to continuing that work together to achieve the goal of a sustainably managed polar bear subsistence harvest.

As discussed in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) recent advance notice of proposed rulemaking (81 FR 78560; November 8, 2016), the Service is currently working with the Alaska Native community to identify a new co-management partner. To allow time for this co-management partner to be identified and to establish a program of locally enforceable ordinances for polar bear harvest, it is appropriate to delay issuance of regulations to administer the annual taking limit, which were originally anticipated to be put into effect on January 1, 2017. The Service believes additional work in establishing local, on-the-ground co-management structures will greatly improve compliance with the annual taking limit.

We now anticipate issuing regulations in 2019, with an anticipated effective date of January 1, 2020. The Service will continue conducting consultation with federally recognized tribes, providing outreach and education to affected communities, and evaluating biological information. During this interim period, the Service will use its enforcement discretion with respect to any take that exceeds the annual taking limit established by the Commission in 2010. Currently, the Service's MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 18.23(f) require Alaskan natives who harvest any polar bears for subsistence purposes or for purposes of selling authentic Native articles of handicrafts and clothing to report such take to the Service and present the skin and skull to Service personnel or the Service's authorized local representative. Under these regulations, an Alaskan native may possess the unmarked, untagged, and unreported polar bear for a period of time not to exceed 30 days from the time of taking for the purpose of transporting the skin and skull to Service personnel or the Service's authorized local representative for marking, tagging, and reporting. These regulations remain in effect.

Pursuant to section 507(b) of the MMPA, we are publishing in the Federal Register this notice of the U.S.-Russia Polar Bear Commission's determination concerning the annual taking limit for the Alaska-Chukotka polar bear population. As detailed above, at its 2016 annual meeting, the Commission agreed to maintain the limit on the annual harvest of polar bears from this population to no more than 58 animals, of which no more than one-third may be female, to be shared equally between the United States and the Russian Federation.

Notice is hereby given that the Advisory Committee on Actuarial Examinations will meet at Willis Towers Watson, 2901 North Central Avenue, Suite 1100, Phoenix, AZ 85012-2731.

The purpose of the meeting is to discuss topics and questions that may be recommended for inclusion on future Joint Board examinations in actuarial mathematics, pension law and methodology referred to in 29 U.S.C. 1242(a)(1)(B).

A determination has been made as required by section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., that the subject of the meeting falls within the exception to the open meeting requirement set forth in Title 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B), and that the public interest requires that such meeting be closed to public participation.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Overview of this information collection:

1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Registration Statement (Foreign Agents).

3. The agency form number: Form NSD-1.

4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Private Sector, Business or other for-profit.

Other: Not-for-profit institutions, and individuals.

Abstract: This form contains registration statement information used for registering foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 611 et seq.

5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that there are 61 respondents, at approximately 1 hour and 22 minutes (1.375 hours) per response to complete.

6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 83.875 annual burden hours. (61 respondents × 1 hour and 22 minutes (1.375) = 83.875 hours).

7. Registrants/foreign agents and the general public are alerted that in the future, the National Security Division will complete its ongoing multi-year design review, testing, and requirements enhancement efforts to offer a web form version of form NSD-1. NSD continues to make progress in enhancing the functionality of FARA eFile. Personnel are in the process of developing new web form versions of the current fillable FARA registration forms with the intent of providing greater standardization, improved intuitive features, and less burdensome requirements that will benefit foreign agents who are required to register under FARA.

New capabilities are expected to improve online search capabilities. NSD is confident that the new features will offer an enhanced system, promoting greater transparency.

If additional information is required contact: Melody D. Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

(1) Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

(2) The Title of the Form/Collection: Supplemental Statement (Foreign Agents).

(3) The agency form number: Form NSD-2.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Private Sector, Business or other for-profit.

Other: Not-for-profit institutions, and individuals.

Abstract: This form contains registration statement information used for registering foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 611 et seq.

5 An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that there are 288 respondents, 2 responses annually per each registrant or approximately 576 responses, at approximately 2 hours and 3 minutes (2.063 hours) per response to complete.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 1,188.29 annual burden hours. (288 respondents × 2 = 576 responses × 2 hours and 3 minutes (2.063) = 1,188.29 hours).

(7) Registrants/foreign agents and the general public are alerted that in the future, the National Security Division will complete its ongoing multi-year design review, testing, and requirements enhancement efforts to offer a web form version of form NSD-2. NSD continues to make progress in enhancing the functionality of FARA eFile. Personnel are in the process of developing new web form versions of the current fillable FARA registration forms with the intent of providing greater standardization, improved intuitive features, and less burdensome requirements that will benefit foreign agents who are required to register under FARA. New capabilities are expected to improve online search capabilities. NSD is confident that the new features will offer an enhanced system, promoting greater transparency.

If additional information is required contact: Melody D. Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Overview of this information collection:

1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Exhibit A to Registration Statement (Foreign Agents).

3. The agency form number: Form NSD-3.

4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Private Sector, Business or other for-profit.

Other: Not-for-profit institutions, and individuals.

Abstract: This form contains registration statement information used for registering foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 611 et seq.

5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that there are 57 respondents annually, at approximately .49 hours (29 minutes) per response to complete.

6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 27.93 annual burden hours. (57 respondents × .49 hours (29 minutes) = 27.93 hours).

7. Registrants/foreign agents and the general public are alerted that in the future, the National Security Division will complete its ongoing multi-year design review, testing, and requirements enhancement efforts to offer a Web form version of form NSD-3. NSD continues to make progress in enhancing the functionality of FARA eFile. Personnel are in the process of developing new web form versions of the current fillable FARA registration forms with the intent of providing greater standardization, improved intuitive features, and less burdensome requirements that will benefit foreign agents who are required to register under FARA. New capabilities are expected to improve online search capabilities. NSD is confident that the new features will offer an enhanced system, promoting greater transparency.

If additional information is required contact: Melody D. Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Overview of this information collection:

1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Law Enforcement Congressional Badge of Bravery.

3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: None.

4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:Law Enforcement Agencies. Under Public Law 110-298 The U.S. Department of Justice Attorney General may request voluntary nominations from an appointed Federal Board, for the names of law enforcement officers cited as performing an act of bravery while in the line of duty, for a Federal Law Enforcement Congressional Badge of Bravery award.

5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 184 applicants annually.

6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated public burden associated with this collection is 61 hours.

If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Overview of this information collection:

1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Amendment to Registration Statement (Foreign Agents).

3. The agency form number: Form NSD-5.

4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Private Sector, Business or other for-profit.

Other: Not-for-profit institutions, and individuals.

Abstract: This form contains registration statement information used for registering foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 611 et seq.

5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that there are 255 respondents, at approximately 1.5 hours (1 hour and 30 minutes) per response to complete.

6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 382.50 annual burden hours. (255 respondents × 1 hour and 30 minutes (1.5 hours) = 382.50 hours).

7. Registrants/foreign agents and the general public are alerted that in the future, the National Security Division will complete its ongoing multi-year design review, testing, and requirements enhancement efforts to offer a web form version of form NSD-5. NSD continues to make progress in enhancing the functionality of FARA eFile. Personnel are in the process of developing new web form versions of the current fillable FARA registration forms with the intent of providing greater standardization, improved intuitive features, and less burdensome requirements that will benefit foreign agents who are required to register under FARA. New capabilities are expected to improve online search capabilities. NSD is confident that the new features will offer an enhanced system, promoting greater transparency.

If additional information is required contact: Melody D. Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Overview of this information collection:

1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Short Form Registration Statement (Foreign Agents).

3. The agency form number: Form NSD-6.

4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Private Sector, Business or other for-profit.

Other: Not-for-profit institutions, and individuals.

Abstract: This form contains registration statement information used for registering foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 611 et seq.

5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that there are 328 respondents annually, at approximately .429 hours (25 minutes) per response to complete.

6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 140.71 annual burden hours. (328 respondents × .429 hours (25 minutes) = 140.71 hours).

7. Registrants/foreign agents and the general public are alerted that in the future, the National Security Division will complete its ongoing multi-year design review, testing, and requirements enhancement efforts to offer a web form version of form NSD-6. NSD continues to make progress in enhancing the functionality of FARA eFile.

Personnel are in the process of developing new web form versions of the current fillable FARA registration forms with the intent of providing greater standardization, improved intuitive features, and less burdensome requirements that will benefit foreign agents who are required to register under FARA.

New capabilities are expected to improve online search capabilities. NSD is confident that the new features will offer an enhanced system, promoting greater transparency.

If additional information is required contact: Melody D. Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Overview of This Information Collection

(1) Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

(2) The Title of the Form/Collection: Exhibit B to Registration Statement (Foreign Agents).

(3) The agency form number: Form NSD-4.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Private Sector, Business or other for-profit.

Other: Not-for-profit institutions, and individuals.

Abstract: This form contains registration statement information used for registering foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 611 et seq.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that there are 178 respondents annually, at approximately .33 hours (20 minutes) per response to complete.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 58.74 annual burden hours. (178 respondents × .33 hours (20 minutes) = 58.74 hours).

(7) Registrants/foreign agents and the general public are alerted that in the future, the National Security Division will complete its ongoing multi-year design review, testing, and requirements enhancement efforts to offer a web form version of form NSD-4. NSD continues to make progress in enhancing the functionality of FARA eFile. Personnel are in the process of developing new web form versions of the current fillable FARA registration forms with the intent of providing greater standardization, improved intuitive features, and less burdensome requirements that will benefit foreign agents who are required to register under FARA. New capabilities are expected to improve online search capabilities. NSD is confident that the new features will offer an enhanced system, promoting greater transparency.

If additional information is required contact: Melody D. Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

The meeting will be open to the public up to the capacity of the room. The meeting will be available telephonically and by WebEx. You must use a touch-tone phone to participate in this meeting. Any interested person may dial the USA toll free conference call number 1-888-790-3531 or toll number 1-210-234-0035, passcode 7238462 followed by the # sign, to participate in this meeting by telephone on both days. The WebEx link is https://nasa.webex.com/; the meeting number on April 24 is 999 766 498, password is APAC24-25; and the meeting number on April 25 is 997 182 323, password is APAC24-25.

The agenda for the meeting includes the following topics:

The agenda will be posted on the Astrophysics Advisory Committee Web page at https://science.nasa.gov/researchers/nac/science-advisory-committees/apac. Attendees will be requested to sign a register and to comply with NASA Headquarters Security requirements, including the presentation of a valid picture ID to Security before access to NASA Headquarters. Due to the Real ID Act, any attendees with driver's licenses issued from non-compliant states must present a second form of ID. Non-compliant states are: Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, and Montana. Foreign nationals attending this meeting will be required to provide a copy of their passport and visa in addition to providing the following information no less than 10 days prior to the meeting: full name; gender; date/place of birth; citizenship; passport information (number, country, telephone); visa information (number, type, expiration date); employer/affiliation information (name of institution, address, country, telephone); title/position of attendee. To expedite admittance, attendees with U.S. citizens and Permanent Residents (green card holders) are requested to provide full name and citizenship status 3 working days in advance. Information should be sent to Ms. KarShelia Henderson, via email at [email protected] or by fax at (202) 358-2779. It is imperative that the meeting be held on this date to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants.

Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings:

1. Date: May 1, 2017.

This meeting will discuss applications for the Seminars for School Teachers grant program, submitted to the Division of Education Programs.

2. Date: May 2, 2017.

This meeting will discuss applications for the Institutes for School Teachers grant program, submitted to the Division of Education Programs.

3. Date: May 2, 2017.

This meeting will discuss applications on the subjects of Languages, Linguistics, and Text Analysis, for Digital Humanities Advancement Grants, submitted to the Office of Digital Humanities.

4. Date: May 3, 2017.

This meeting will discuss applications on the subject of Public Programs, for Digital Humanities Advancement Grants, submitted to the Office of Digital Humanities.

5. Date: May 8, 2017.

This meeting will discuss applications on the subject of Scholarly Communications, for Digital Humanities Advancement Grants, submitted to the Office of Digital Humanities.

6. Date: May 10, 2017.

This meeting will discuss applications on the subject of Education, for Digital Humanities Advancement Grants, submitted to the Office of Digital Humanities.

7. Date: May 11, 2017

This meeting will discuss applications for Level III Digital Humanities Advancement Grants, submitted to the Office of Digital Humanities.

8. Date: May 16, 2017.

This meeting will discuss applications for the Institutes for Advanced Topics in the Digital Humanities grant program, submitted to the Office of Digital Humanities.

Because these meetings will include review of personal and/or proprietary financial and commercial information given in confidence to the agency by grant applicants, the meetings will be closed to the public pursuant to sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6) of Title 5, U.S.C., as amended. I have made this determination pursuant to the authority granted me by the Chairman's Delegation of Authority to Close Advisory Committee Meetings dated April 15, 2016.

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0092, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

• Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0092.

• NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this document.

• NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

Please include Docket ID NRC-2017-0092, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject, in your comment submission.

The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in § 50.92 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown below.

The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.

Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-day comment period if circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. If the Commission takes action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. If the Commission makes a final no significant hazards consideration determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.

Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.

As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements for standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures.

Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document.

If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to establish when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2.

A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission by June 12, 2017. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section, except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, or federally recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).

If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled.

All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562, August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system.

A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.

Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.

Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. For example, in some instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.

For further details with respect to these license amendment applications, see the application for amendment which is available for public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional direction on accessing information related to this document, see the “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” section of this document.

Date of amendment request: December 15, 2016. A publicly available version is in Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML16350A422.

Description of amendment request: The amendments would modify Technical Specification 3.1.2, “Core Reactivity,” to revise the Completion Times of Required Action A.1 and A.2 from 72 hours to 7 days. This proposed change is consistent with Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-142-A, Revision 0, “Increase the Completion Time when the Core Reactivity Balance is Not Within Limit.”

Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

Attorney for licensee: Kate Nolan, Deputy General Counsel, Duke Energy Corporation, 526 South Church Street—DEC45A, Charlotte, NC 28202.

NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.

Date of amendment request: February 10, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17045A006.

Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would revise the DNPS, Units 2 and 3, technical specifications (TSs) by replacing the existing specifications related to “operation with a potential for draining the reactor vessels” (OPDRVs), with revised requirements for reactor pressure vessel (RVP) water inventory control (WIC) to protect Safety Limit 2.1.1.3. Safety Limit 2.1.1.3 requires reactor vessel water level to be greater than the top of active irradiated fuel. The proposed amendment would adopt changes, with variations as noted in the license amendment request, and is based on the NRC-approved safety evaluation for Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-542, Revision 2, “Reactor Pressure Vessel Water Inventory Control,” dated December 20, 2016.

Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.

NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.

Date of amendment request: July 15, 2016, as supplemented by letter dated February 13, 2017. Publicly-available versions are in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML16201A306 and ML17045A036, respectively.

Description of amendment request: The amendment request was originally noticed in the Federal Register on October 25, 2016 (81 FR 73435). The notice is being reissued in its entirety to include the revised scope, description of the amendment request, and proposed no significant hazards consideration determination. The amendment would revise the Radiological Emergency Plan Annex for TMI, Unit 1. The proposed changes would decrease the radiation protection technician staffing from three to two technicians. The proposed amendment would also make changes to staffing of on-shift maintenance personnel. Specifically, the amendment would revise the on-shift position operations support center director (renamed repair team lead) to remove the requirement that the position be from the maintenance organization; remove two dedicated maintenance technicians from the on-shift staffing total; and remove two additional personnel from the repair and corrective actions major task and assign them to respond within 60 minutes, as well as one additional staff person to respond within 90 minutes.

Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.

NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

Date of amendment request: February 23, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17055A631.

Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise the operating licenses and technical specifications to remove time, cycle, or modification-related items. Additionally, the proposed amendment makes editorial and formatting changes. The time, cycle, or modification-related items have been implemented or superseded and are no longer applicable.

Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.

NRC Acting Branch Chief: Kimberly J. Green.

Date of amendment request: February 23, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17055C359.

Brief description of amendment request: The proposed amendments would revise the PINGP, Units 1 and 2, Emergency Plan (E-Plan) to increase augmentation times for Emergency Response Organization (ERO) response functions. The amendment would also include other E-Plan modifications to include facility activation criteria, changes to survey requirements, removal of radiation protection support from Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, and removal of some positions from the augmentation list.

Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration.

Attorney for licensee: Peter M. Glass, Assistant General Counsel, Xcel Energy Services, Inc., 414 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 55401

NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.

Date of amendment request: February 27, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17060A662.

Description of amendment request: The requested amendment proposes to depart from Tier 2 information in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) and to change Combined License Appendix A, Technical Specifications (TS), to modify engineered safety features logic for containment vacuum relief actuation.

Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

Attorney for licensee: Ms. Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC, 20004-2514.

NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

Date of amendment request: February 1, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17032A259.

Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise Technical Specification (TS) 3.6.4.3, “Standby Gas Treatment (SGT) System,” and TS 3.7.3, “Control Room Emergency Outside Air Supply (CREOAS) System,” by changing the run time of monthly surveillance requirements (SRs) for the standby gas treatment and control room emergency outside air supply systems from 10 hours to 15 minutes. This change is consistent with Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-522, Revision 0, “Revise Ventilation System Surveillance Requirements to Operate for 10 hours per Month,” with minor variations. The notice of availability and model safety evaluation of TSTF-522, Revision 0, were published in the Federal Register on September 20, 2012 (77 FR 58421).

Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below, along with NRC edits in square brackets:

The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

Attorney for licensee: Damon D. Obie, Associate General Counsel, Talen Energy Supply, LLC, 835 Hamilton St., Suite 150, Allentown, PA 18101.

NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

The following notices were previously published as separate individual notices. The notice content was the same as above. They were published as individual notices either because time did not allow the Commission to wait for this biweekly notice or because the action involved exigent circumstances. They are repeated here because the biweekly notice lists all amendments issued or proposed to be issued involving no significant hazards consideration.

For details, see the individual notice in the Federal Register on the day and page cited. This notice does not extend the notice period of the original notice.

Date of amendment request: February 23, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17055A365.

Brief description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would revise the technical specification requirements for high pressure coolant injection system and reactor core isolation cooling system actuation instrumentation in low pressure conditions.

Date of publication of individual notice in Federal Register: March 13, 2017 (82 FR 13512).

Expiration date of individual notice: April 12, 2017 (public comments); May 12, 2017 (hearing requests).

During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has determined for each of these amendments that the application complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.

A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility operating license or combined license, as applicable, proposed no significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing in connection with these actions, was published in the Federal Register as indicated.

Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment, it is so indicated.

For further details with respect to the action see (1) the applications for amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) the Commission's related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment as indicated. All of these items can be accessed as described in the “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” section of this document.

Date of amendment request: April 24, 2016, as supplemented by letters dated September 14, 2016, and March 8, 2017.

Brief description of amendment: The amendment adopted Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Change Traveler TSTF-339, Revision 2, “Relocate TS [Technical Specification] Parameters to COLR [Core Operating Limits Report],” consistent with NRC-approved Westinghouse topical report WCAP-14483-A, “Generic Methodology for Expanded Core Operating Limits Report,” and relocated reactor coolant system-related cycle-specific parameters and core safety limits from the TSs to the COLR.

Date of issuance: March 23, 2017.

Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 120 days of issuance.

Amendment No.: 250. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17039A153; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-23: Amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and TSs.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 5, 2016 (81 FR 43651). The supplemental letters dated September 14, 2016, and March 8, 2017, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 23, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of amendment request: December 20, 2016.

Brief description of amendment: The amendment authorized use of the release fractions listed in Tables 1 and 3 of NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.183, “Alternative Radiological Source Terms for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors,” for a limited number of partial length fuel rods that are currently in the Limerick Generating Station, Unit 2, Cycle 14, reactor core for the remainder of the current operating cycle and revise the licensing basis for subsequent fuel movement of irradiated fuel bundles containing partial length rods.

Date of issuance: March 15, 2017.

Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented prior to exceeding the burnup limit in the current operating Cycle 14.

Amendment No.: 186. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17047A353; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-85: The amendment revised the licensing basis to allow the use of the release fractions listed in Tables 1 and 3 of NRC RG 1.183 for a limited number of partial length fuel rods currently in the Cycle 14 reactor core for the remainder of the current operating cycle and subsequent fuel movements.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: January 31, 2017 (82 FR 8871).

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 15, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of amendment request: March 31, 2016, as supplemented by letters dated May 31, 2016; October 27, 2016; November 17, 2016; and December 30, 2016.

Description of amendment request: The amendment revised Technical Specification 6.15, “Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program,” to require a program that is in accordance with Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Topical Report NEI 94-01, Revision 3-A, “Industry Guideline for Implementing Performance-Based Option of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J.”

Date of issuance: March 15, 2017.

Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of issuance.

Amendment No.: 153. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17046A443; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

Facility Operating License No. NPF-86: Amendment revised the Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 19, 2016 (81 FR 46964). The supplemental letters dated October 27, 2016; November 17, 2016; and December 30, 2016, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 15, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of amendment request: June 17, 2016, as supplemented by letters dated December 27, 2016, and February 17, 2017.

Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Technical Specifications by adding a note permitting one low pressure coolant injection subsystem of residual heat removal to be considered OPERABLE in Operating Conditions 4 and 5 during alignment and operation for decay heat removal, if capable of being manually realigned and not otherwise inoperable.

Date of issuance: March 15, 2017.

Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance.

Amendment No.: 202. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17053A178; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-57: Amendment revised the Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 16, 2016 (81 FR 54615). The supplemental letters dated December 27, 2016, and February 17, 2017, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 15, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of amendment request: May 11, 2016, as supplemented by letter dated December 13, 2016.

Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Hope Creek Generating Station Technical Specification (TS) requirements by deleting TS Action Statement 3.4.2.1.b concerning stuck open safety/relief valves. In addition, TS 3.6.2.1 Action Statements regarding suppression chamber water temperature were revised to align with NUREG-1433, Revision 4, “Standard Technical Specifications—General Electric Plants (BWR/4).”

Date of issuance: March 21, 2017.

Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance.

Amendment No.: 203. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17047A020; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-57: Amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and TSs.

Date of notice in Federal Register: January 17, 2017 (82 FR 4932). The license amendment request was originally noticed in the Federal Register on July 19, 2016 (81 FR 46965). The notice was reissued in its entirety to include the revised scope, description of the amendment request, and proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 21, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of application for amendments: August 31, 2015, as supplemented by letters dated February 17, 2016; April 8, 2016; May 13, 2016; May 26, 2016; June 9, 2016; and November 2, 2016.

Brief description of amendments: The amendments approved a standard emergency plan for all Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., sites and site-specific annexes.

Date of issuance: March 14, 2017.

Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented by January 31, 2018.

Amendment Nos.: VEGP, Unit 1—184, Unit 2—167, Unit 3—74, Unit 4—73; Farley, Unit 1—209, Unit 2—206; and Hatch, Unit 1—283, Unit 2—228. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Package Accession No. ML16141A090, documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-68, NPF-81, NPF-2, NPF-8, DPR-57, and NPF-5: The amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses.

Facility Combined License Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92: The amendments revised the Facility Combined Licenses.

Date of initial notices in Federal Register: October 27, 2015 (80 FR 65816). The supplemental letters dated February 17, 2016; April 8, 2016; May 13, 2016; May 26, 2016; June 9, 2016; and November 2, 2016, provided additional information that clarified the applications, did not expand the scope of the applications as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determinations as published in the Federal Register.

The Commission's related evaluations of the amendments is contained in Safety Evaluations dated March 14, 2017.

No significant hazards considerations comments received: No.

Date of amendment request: March 3, 2016, as supplemented by letter dated November 3, 2016.

Brief description of amendments: The amendments adopted Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-01, Revision 6, “Development of Emergency Action Levels for Non-Passive Reactors,” to replace the Emergency Action Level (EAL) schemes for VEGP, FNP, and HNP that are currently based on Revision 4. Additionally, SNC proposes changes to the radiation monitors at FNP.

Date of issuance: March 16, 2017.

Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 1 year of issuance.

Amendment Nos.: Farley—Unit 1 (210) and Unit 2 (207); Vogtle—Unit 1 (185) and Unit 2 (168); and Hatch—Unit 1 (284) and Unit 2 (229). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17023A237; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2, NPF-8, NPF-68, NPF-81, DPR-57, NPF-5: Amendments revised the Emergency Action Level Schemes.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 26, 2016 (81 FR 24664). The supplemental letter dated November 3, 2016, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 16, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of amendment request: July 27, 2016, as supplemented by letter dated September 13, 2016.

Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised Technical Specification 3.6.4.1, “Secondary Containment,” Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.6.4.1.3 to provide an allowance for brief, inadvertent, simultaneous opening of redundant secondary containment access doors during normal entry and exit conditions.

Date of issuance: March 27, 2017.

Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance.

Amendment Nos.: 267 (Unit 1) and 249 (Unit 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17067A444; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-14 and NPF-22: The amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 25, 2016 (81 FR 73441).

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 27, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of amendment request: April 14, 2016.

Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised Technical Specification (TS) 5.3, “Unit Staff Qualifications,” for BFN, Units 1, 2, and 3, and SQN, Units 1 and 2, to delete the references to Regulatory Guide 1.8, Revision 2, and replace them with references to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Nuclear Quality Assurance Plan. The changes will ensure consistent regulatory requirements regarding staff qualifications for the TVA nuclear fleet. The changes will further allow TVA to implement standard procedures related to staff qualifications. Additionally, the TS changes are consistent with the intent of NRC Administrative Letter 95-06 in that the relocated requirements are adequately controlled by 10 CFR 50 Appendix B and the quality assurance change control process in 10 CFR 50.54(a).

Date of issuance: March 27, 2017.

Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance.

Amendment Nos.: BFN—298 (Unit 1), 322 (Unit 2), and 282 (Unit 3); and SQN—338 (Unit 1), and 331 (Unit 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17034A360; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-33, DPR-52, DPR-68, DPR-77, and DPR-79: Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 2, 2016 (81 FR 50739).

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 27, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of amendment request: July 14, 2016.

Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the date of cyber security plan implementation schedule Milestone 8 from July 31, 2017, to December 31, 2017.

Date of issuance: March 16, 2017.

Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of issuance.

Amendment No.: 297 (Unit 1), 321 (Unit 2), 281 (Unit 3). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17052A136; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-33, DPR-52, and DPR-68: Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 8, 2016 (81 FR 78666).

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 16, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of amendment request: November 14, 2016.

Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the WBN Unit 2 Cyber Security Plan Implementation Schedule for Milestone 8 and associated license condition in the Facility Operating License.

Date of issuance: March 16, 2017.

Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of issuance.

Amendment No.: 7. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17033A333; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

Facility Operating License No. NPF-96: Amendment revised the Facility Operating License.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: January 5, 2017 (82 FR 1370).

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 16, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of amendment request: May 16, 2016.

Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Technical Specifications (TS) to correct an administrative error in the initial issuance of the TSs regarding the steam generator narrow range level specified in Surveillance Requirement 3.4.6.3.

Date of issuance: March 23, 2017.

Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance.

Amendment No.: 8. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17019A019; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

Facility Operating License No. NPF-96: Amendment revised the Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 13, 2016 (81 FR 62933).

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 23, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Date of amendment request. June 14, 2016.

Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Cyber Security Plan (CSP) Implementation Milestone 8 completion date and paragraph 2.E of the Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-42 for WCGS to incorporate the revised CSP implementation schedule.

Date of issuance: March 24, 2017.

Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days from the date of issuance.

Amendment No.: 217. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17024A241; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-42: The amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 16, 2016 (81 FR 54618).

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 24, 2017.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0094 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0094.

• NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

• NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

Please include Docket ID NRC-2017-0094 in your submission.

The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC posts all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov and enters the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

In a March 10, 2014, Commission Action Memorandum (COMAMM-14-0001/COMWDM-14-0001, “Background and Proposed Direction to NRC Staff to Verify Assumptions Made Concerning Patient Release Guidance” (ADAMS Accession No. ML14072A112), then NRC Chairman MacFarlane and then Commissioner Magwood brought into question, among other things, whether significant regulatory changes to the patient release program are warranted. They asked whether different criteria should be used to determine when patients should be released, whether the application of the current dose release standard needed to be clarified, whether all exposed members of the public should be subject to the same patient release dose limit, and whether new release requirements are needed for patients who are likely to expose young children and pregnant women.

In the Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) to COMAMM-14-0001/COMWDM-14-0001 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14118A387), the Commission, among other things, directed the NRC staff to evaluate whether regulatory changes are necessary to clarify the NRC's current release criteria and whether additional or alternate criteria are needed. As a result of earlier public comments on other elements of the SRM (November 16, 2015; 80 FR 70843), the staff identified two additional questions to consider. These are whether a requirement is needed to ensure the discussion between the licensee and patient concerning patient isolation occurs in sufficient time for licensees or patients to make necessary arrangements for holding or releasing the patient and whether patients required to receive instructions on minimizing dose to others should be provided with these instructions before the administration.

The NRC is interested in obtaining input from as many stakeholders as possible, including the NRC's Advisory Committee on the Medical Use of Isotopes, professional organizations, physicians, patients, patient advocacy groups, licensees, Agreement States, and other interested individuals. The focus of this request is to gather information that will permit the NRC staff to determine whether significant regulatory changes to the patient release program are warranted.

During the comment period on April 25, 2017 and May 23, 2017, the NRC will have two public meeting at the NRC's Headquarters that will explain and clarify the information requested with members of the public. These meetings will be webcast.

The NRC does not intend to provide any responses to comments received during the public meeting(s). The public meeting(s) will be noticed on the NRC's public meeting Web site at least 10 calendar days before the meeting. Members of the public should monitor the NRC's public meeting Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm.

The NRC will also post the meeting notices on the Federal rulemaking Web site at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2017-0094. The NRC may post additional materials related to this document, including public comments, on the Federal rulemaking Web site. The Federal rulemaking Web site allows you to receive alerts when changes or additions occur in a docket folder. To subscribe: (1) Navigate to the docket folder (NRC-2017-0094); (2) click the “Sign up for Email Alerts” link; and (3) enter your email address and select how frequently you would like to receive emails (daily, weekly, or monthly).

The NRC is asking the public to comment on whether the NRC should develop an activity-based patient release threshold under which patients would be required to be maintained in a clinic-sponsored facility (e.g., a medical facility or facility under the licensee's control) until the standard for release is met.

Question: Should the NRC develop an activity-based patient release threshold?

1. If so, explain why and provide a potential activity-based criterion.

2. If not, explain why the regulations should remain as is.

3. In either case, describe the resulting health and safety benefits, or lack of benefits, to the individual being released and to individual members of the public.

Currently, under section 35.75(a) of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), allows a licensee to release a patient if the dose to any other individual is not likely to exceed 5 milliSieverts (mSv) (0.5 rem). The NRC staff determined in the NRC' Regulatory Issue Summary 2008-07, “Dose Limit for Patient Release Under 10 CFR 35.75” (ADAMS Accession No. ML063030572) that, as written the regulation is ambiguous and the dose to any other individual from the released individual does not reflect the NRC's intent of a per-year limit and that this limit has been interpreted by others to be per release. The NRC staff explained that a “per release” interpretation does not consider the cumulative dose received in a year from the same released individual or repeated exposure to different released individuals. The Commission has asked the NRC staff to clarify this issue.

Question: Should the NRC amend the regulations to clarify the time frame for the current dose limit in 10 CFR 35.75(a) for releasing Individuals? For example, should the regulations explicitly state that the criterion is a per year limit? If not, is there a different criterion that the NRC should consider? In either case, describe the resulting health and safety benefits, or lack of benefit, to the individual being released and to individual members of the public as a result of the proposed clarification.

In the current NRC patient release dose criterion, the NRC does not distinguish between family members, young children, pregnant women, caregivers, hotel workers, and other members of the public. Further, the NRC patient release dose criterion is above the 10 CFR part 20 public dose limit.

Question: Should the NRC continue to apply the same dose criteria of 5 mSv (0.5 rem), to all members of the general public, including family members, young children, pregnant women, caregivers, hotel workers, and other members of the public when considering the release of patients?

1. If so, explain why.

2. If not, what criterion should the NRC use for an individual group or groups? Specify the group (e.g., family members, young children, pregnant women, caregivers, hotel workers, or others) for each criterion.

3. In either case, describe the resulting health and safety benefits, or lack of benefits, to the individual being released and to individual members of the public.

The current NRC patient release program requires the licensee to provide the released individual with instructions if the dose to any individual is likely to exceed 1 mSv (0.1 rem). The NRC does not have specific requirements for releasing patients who are likely to expose young children or pregnant women to doses above the public dose limit.

Question: Should the NRC include a specific requirement for the release of a patient who is likely to expose young children or pregnant women to doses above the public dose limit?

1. If so, explain why and describe what the requirement should include.

2. If not, explain why the requirement is not needed.

3. In either case, describe the resulting health and safety benefits, or lack of benefits, to the individual being released and to a young child or to pregnant woman.

The current NRC patient release program permits the licensee to authorize the release from its control of any individual who has been administered unsealed byproduct material or implants containing byproduct material if the total effective dose equivalent to any other individual from exposure to the released individual is not likely to exceed 5 mSv (0.5 rem). In some common procedures (e.g., Iodine-131 procedures), the patients must isolate themselves for the licensee to meet this dose release requirement. In other cases, the patient cannot be released and the licensee must make arrangements to isolate the patient. The requirements are silent on when the licensee should discuss patient isolation with the patient. As a result, both patients and licensees may not have time to make appropriate isolation arrangements prior to the planned administration. Some patients reported that they were unaware of a need to isolate themselves from others prior to the administration.

Question: Should the NRC have a specific requirement for the licensee to have a patient isolation discussion with patients in sufficient time prior to the administration to provide the patient time to make isolation arrangements or the licensee to make plans to hold the patient, if the patient cannot be immediately released?

1. If so, explain why and describe what the requirement should include.

2. If not, explain why the requirement is not needed.

3. In either case, describe the resulting health and safety benefits, or lack of benefits, to individual being released, the licensee, and to the public.

The current NRC patient release regulations require the licensee to provide the released individual with instructions if the dose to any individual is likely to exceed 1 mSv (0.1 rem). The requirements are silent on when the required instructions should be given to the patient. Some patients are given instructions along with other medical release paperwork and may not be aware of the instructions.

Question: Should the NRC explicitly include the time frame for providing instructions in the regulations (e.g., the instructions should be given prior to the procedure)?

1. If so, explain why and provide a recommended time period for the instructions to be provided.

2. If not, explain why the requirement is not needed.

3. In either case, describe the resulting health and safety benefits, or lack of benefits, to the individual being released, the licensee, and to the public.

On April 4, 2017, the Postal Service filed a request, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3641(e)(2), for an exemption from the $10 million annual revenue limitation for the Customized Delivery market test.1 The Commission authorized the market test to proceed in Order No. 2224 and authorized the extension of the market test in Order No. 3543 until October 31, 2017.2

The Postal Service states that “Customized Delivery is an experimental package delivery service that offers delivery of groceries and other prepackaged goods within a customized delivery window.” Request at 4. The Postal Service states that the purpose of the market test is to test and develop a long-term, scalable solution to facilitate expansion to additional markets. Id.

Total revenues anticipated or received by the Postal Service from the Customized Delivery market test must not exceed $10 million in any year unless the Commission exempts the market test from that limit.3 If the Commission grants an exemption, total revenues anticipated or received by the Postal Service from Customized Delivery may not exceed $50 million in any year, adjusted for inflation. Id. 39 U.S.C. 3641(e)(2), (g). In its initial notice for the Customized Delivery market test, the Postal Service requested an exemption from the $10 million revenue limitation based on then-current projections of expected revenue.4 The Commission denied the request for exemption as premature, but noted that the Postal Service may resubmit its request “once it collects sufficient data to calculate the total revenue received and estimate the additional revenue anticipated for each fiscal year of the market test.” Order No. 2224 at 18.

The Postal Service asserts that it now has the data available to make the calculations requested by the Commission. Request at 3. The Postal Service states that if current demand for Customized Delivery continues, it anticipates reaching the inflation adjusted $10 million revenue limitation for FY 2017 in early June 2017.5

The Commission shall approve the request for exemption if it determines that: (1) The product is likely to benefit the public and meet an expected demand; (2) the product is likely to contribute to the financial stability of the Postal Service; and (3) the product is unlikely to result in unfair or otherwise inappropriate competition. 39 U.S.C. 3641(e)(2). In its Request, the Postal Service discusses how the Customized Delivery market test benefits the public and meets an expected demand, contributes to the Postal Service's financial stability, and is unlikely to result in unfair or inappropriate competition. Request at 5-7. The Commission's regulations require the Postal Service to file cost and revenue information with its request for exemption. 39 CFR 3035.16(f). The Postal Service asserts that the financial documentation and workpapers submitted under seal show actual and expected revenue and costs for the market test. Request at 1, 4.

The Commission invites comments on whether the Request complies with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, including 39 U.S.C. 3641, 39 CFR part 3035, Order No. 2224, and Order No. 3543. Comments are due no later than April 26, 2017. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

39 U.S.C. 505 requires the Commission to designate an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in all public proceedings (Public Representative). The Commission previously appointed Lauren A. D'Agostino to serve as the Public Representative in this proceeding. She remains appointed to serve as the Public Representative.

It is ordered:

1. The Commission invites comments on the Request of the United States Postal Service for Exemption from Revenue Limitation on Market Test of Experimental Product—Customized Delivery, with Portions Filed Under Seal, filed April 4, 2017.

2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Lauren A. D'Agostino remains appointed to serve as the Public Representative in this proceeding.

3. Comments by interested persons are due no later than April 26, 2017.

4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.