13582 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 7, 2012 / Notices 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: March 2, 2012. 

Alexa Posny, 

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2012–5576 Filed 3–6–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Disability and Rehabilitation Research 

Project; Burn Model Systems Centers 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice. 

Overview Information: 

Proposed priority—National Institute 

on Disability and Rehabilitation 

Research (NIDRR)—Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Projects and 

Centers Program—Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Project 

(DRRP)—Burn Model Systems Centers. 

CFDA Number: 84.133A–3. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services proposes a priority under the 

Disability and Rehabilitation Research 

Projects and Centers Program 

administered by the National Institute 

on Disability and Rehabilitation 

Research (NIDRR). Specifically, this 

notice proposes a priority for DRRPs 

that will serve as Burn Model Systems 

(BMS) Centers. The Assistant Secretary 

may use this priority for competitions in 

fiscal year (FY) 2012 and later years. We 

take this action to focus research 

attention on areas of national need. We 

intend this priority to contribute to 

improved outcomes for individuals with 

burn injury. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before April 6, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments about 

this notice to Lynn Medley, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW., Room 5140, Potomac 

Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 

20202–2700. 

If you prefer to send your comments 

by email, use the following address: 

lynn.medley@ed.gov. You must include 

‘‘Proposed Priority for Burn Model 

Systems (BMS) Centers’’ in the subject 

line of your electronic message. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lynn Medley. Telephone: (202) 245– 

7338 or by email: Lynn.Medley@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), call the 

Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 

1–800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

This notice of proposed priority is in 

concert with NIDRR’s currently 

approved Long-Range Plan (Plan). The 

Plan, which was published in the 

Federal Register on February 15, 2006 

(71 FR 8165), can be accessed on the 

Internet at the following site: http:// 

www2.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/ 

other/2006–1/021506d.pdf. 

Through the implementation of the 

Plan, NIDRR seeks to: (1) Improve the 

quality and utility of disability and 

rehabilitation research; (2) foster an 

exchange of expertise, information, and 

training to facilitate the advancement of 

knowledge and understanding of the 

unique needs of traditionally 

underserved populations; (3) determine 

best strategies and programs to improve 

rehabilitation outcomes for underserved 

populations; (4) identify research gaps; 

(5) identify mechanisms of integrating 

research and practice; and (6) 

disseminate findings. 

This notice proposes a priority that 

NIDRR intends to use for a DRRP 

competition in FY 2012 and possibly 

later years. However, nothing precludes 

NIDRR from publishing additional 

priorities, if needed. Furthermore, 

NIDRR is under no obligation to make 

an award for this priority. The decision 

to make an award will be based on the 

quality of applications received and 

available funding. 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding this 

notice. To ensure that your comments 

have maximum effect in developing the 

notice of final priority, we urge you to 

identify clearly the specific topic that 

each comment addresses. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Orders 12866 

and 13563 and their overall requirement 

of reducing regulatory burden that 

might result from this proposed priority. 

Please let us know of any further ways 

we could reduce potential costs or 

increase potential benefits while 

preserving the effective and efficient 

administration of the program. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about this notice in room 5140, 550 12th 

Street SW., PCP, Washington, DC, 

between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4 

p.m., Washington, DC time, Monday 

through Friday of each week except 

Federal holidays. 

Assistance to Individuals With 

Disabilities in Reviewing the 

Rulemaking Record: On request we will 

provide an appropriate accommodation 

or auxiliary aid to an individual with a 

disability who needs assistance to 

review the comments or other 

documents in the public rulemaking 

record for this notice. If you want to 

schedule an appointment for this type of 

accommodation or auxiliary aid, please 

contact the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the Disability and Rehabilitation 

Research Projects and Centers Program 

is to plan and conduct research, 

demonstration projects, training, and 

related activities, including 

international activities, to develop 

methods, procedures, and rehabilitation 

technology, that maximize the full 

inclusion and integration into society, 

employment, independent living, family 

support, and economic and social selfsufficiency of individuals with 

disabilities, especially individuals with 

the most severe disabilities, and to 

improve the effectiveness of services 

authorized under the Rehabilitation Act 

of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation 

Act). 

Disability and Rehabilitation Research 

Projects 

The purpose of NIDRR’s DRRPs, 

which are funded through the Disability 

and Rehabilitation Research Projects 

and Centers Program, are to improve the 

effectiveness of services authorized 

under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as 

amended, by developing methods, 

procedures, and rehabilitation 

technologies that advance a wide range 

of independent living and employment 

outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities, especially individuals with 

the most severe disabilities. DRRPs 

carry out one or more of the following 

types of activities, as specified and 

defined in 34 CFR 350.13 through 

350.19: Research, training, 

demonstration, development, 

dissemination, utilization, and technical 

assistance. 

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) 

and 764(a). 

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 

CFR part 350. 

Proposed Priority: 

This notice contains one proposed 

priority. 

Burn Model Systems (BMS) Centers. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 7, 2012 / Notices 13583 

Background: 

The American Burn Association 

(ABA) reports that 450,000 persons in 

the United States receive medical 

treatment for burn injuries annually 

(ABA, 2011). Of these, 3,500 die and 

45,000 are hospitalized. Of those 

hospitalized, 25,000 are treated in 

hospitals with burn centers. With 

advances in early medical response to 

burn injuries and advances in infection 

control, survival rates of those incurring 

large burns have significantly increased 

(ABA, 2011b; Soman, Greenhalgh, & 

Palmieri, 2010). For those who survive, 

there are often significant challenges 

that affect their functional outcomes. 

Physical challenges may include severe 

contractures, joint deformities, 

neurologic and musculosketal problems, 

scarring, pain, and fatigue (Dewey, 

Richard, & Parry, 2011; Gabriel, 2011; 

Schneider, Holavanahalli, Helm, 

Goldstein, & Kowalske, K., 2006; 

Schneider & Qu, 2011). Psychological 

challenges may include posttraumatic 

stress, depression, and anxiety 

(Fauerbach et al., 2007; Ullrich, Askay, 

& Patterson, 2009; Wiechman, 2011). 

Psychosocial and environmental factors 

make community integration, including 

return to school and work, difficult 

(Esselman, 2011; Schneider, Bassi, & 

Ryan, 2009). Improvements in survival 

rates have highlighted the need for 

comprehensive rehabilitation treatment 

teams that provide a continuum of 

coordinated services from admission to 

the burn unit to assistance with 

community reintegration, and a 

combined focus on physical and 

psychological rehabilitation (Esselman 

& Kowalske, 2011; Richard et al., 2008). 

The Burn Injury Model Systems 

centers (BMS Centers) program was 

created by NIDRR in 1994 to provide 

leadership in rehabilitation as a key 

component of exemplary burn care and 

to advance the research base on effective 

rehabilitation services for burn 

survivors. The mission of the BMS 

Centers is to improve the lives of 

persons who experience burn injury and 

their families by creating and 

disseminating new knowledge about the 

natural course of burn injury and 

rehabilitation treatment and outcomes 

following burn injury. NIDRR currently 

funds 4 BMS Centers throughout the 

United States. Each BMS Center 

provides a coordinated system of burn 

injury care to individuals who sustain a 

burn injury and conducts burn research, 

including clinical research and the 

analysis of standardized data in 

collaboration with other BMS Centers. 

Since 1998, the BMS Centers have 

collected and contributed information 

on common data elements for a 

centralized BMS database, which is 

maintained through a NIDRR-funded 

grant for a National Data and Statistical 

Center for the BMS. (Additional 

information on the BMS database can be 

found at http://bms-dcc.ucdenver.edu/). 

The National Data and Statistical Center 

for the BMS coordinates data collection 

among the BMS Centers, manages the 

BMS database, and provides statistical 

support to the BMS Centers. As of 

December, 2011, BMS Centers have 

contributed 4,917 cases to the BMS 

database, with follow up data available 

for 3,419 participants at 6-months post 

injury; 2,998 at 1 year post injury; and 

2,481 at 2 years post injury. During the 

2007–2012 grant cycle, data collection 

was extended to include information 

from participants at 5 and 10 years post 

injury. 

Through this priority, we seek to fund 

new BMS Centers that will continue to 

provide a multidisciplinary system of 

rehabilitation care specifically designed 

to meet the needs of individuals with 

burn injury. These services would span 

the continuum of treatment from acute 

care through community re-entry. Under 

this priority, BMS Centers would engage 

in initiatives and new approaches and 

maintain close working relationships 

with other governmental and non-profit 

institutions and organizations to 

coordinate scientific efforts, encourage 

joint planning, and promote the 

interchange of data and reports among 

burn injury researchers. 

A committee consisting of the 

individual BMS project directors has, 

since its inception, guided the BMS 

Centers program. This group meets 

annually in Washington, DC and at the 

annual ABA meeting. They also meet by 

teleconference throughout the year. 

NIDRR intends to form such a 

committee with the project directors 

awarded grants under this proposed 

priority. 

References: 

American Burn Association. (2011). Burn 

Incidence and Treatment in the US: 2011 

Fact Sheet. Retrieved December 1, 2011, from 

http://www.ameriburn.org/ 

resources_factsheet.php. 

American Burn Association. (2011b). 

National Burn Repository: 2011 Report 

Dataset Version 7.0. Retrieved December 2, 

1011, from http://www.ameriburn.org/ 

2011NBRAnnualReport.pdf. 

Dewey, W.S., Richard, R.L., & Parry, I.S. 

(2011). Positioning, splinting, and 

contracture management. In P. C. Esselman, 

K. J. Kowalske, & G. H. Kraft (Eds.), Burn 

Rehabilitation, Physical Medicine and 

Rehabilitation Clinics of North America, 

22(2), 229–247. 

Gabriel, V. (2011). Hypertrophic scar. In P. 

C. Esselman, K. J. Kowalske, & G. H. Kraft 

(Eds.), Burn Rehabilitation, Physical 

Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North 

America, 22(2), 301–310. 

Esselman, P.C. (2011). Community 

integration outcome after burn injury. In P. 

C. Esselman, K. J. Kowalske, & G. H. Kraft 

(Eds.), Burn Rehabilitation, Physical 

Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North 

America, 22(2), 351–356. 

Esselman, P.C. & Kowalske, K. J. (2011). 

Burn Rehabilitation, Physical Medicine and 

Rehabilitation Clinics of North America, 

22(2), xiii-xv. 

Fauerbach, J.A., McKibben, J., Bienvenu, 

O.J., Magyar-Russell, G., Smith, M.T., 

Holavanahalli, R., Patterson, D.R., 

Wiechman, S.A., Blakeney, P., & Lezotte, D. 

(2007). Psychological distress after major 

burn injury. Psychosomatic Medicine, 69(5), 

473–482. 

Richard, R.L., Hedman, T.L., Quick, C.D., 

Barillo, D.J., Cancio, L.C., Renz, E.M., 

Chapman, T.T., Dewey, W.S., Dougherty, 

M.E., Esselman, P.C., Forbes-Duchart, L., 

Franzen, B.J., Hunter, H., Kowalske, K., 

Moore, M.L., Nakamura, D.Y., Nedelec, B., 

Niszczak, J., Parry, I., Serghiou, M., Ward, 

R.S., Holcomb, J.B., Wolf, S.E. (2008). A 

clarion to recommit and reaffirm burn 

rehabilitation. Journal of Burn Care & 

Research, 29(3), 425–432. 

Schneider, J.C., Bassi, S., & Ryan, C.M. 

(2009). Barriers impacting employment after 

burn injury. Journal of Burn Care & Research, 

30(2), 294–300. 

Schneider, J.C., Holavanahalli, R., Helm, 

P., Goldstein, R., & Kowalske, K. (2006). 

Contractures in burn injury: Defining the 

problem. Journal of Burn Care & Research, 

27(4), 508–514. 

Schneider, J.C. & Qu, H.D. (2011). 

Neurologic and musculoskeletal 

complications of burn injuries. Burn 

Rehabilitation, Physical Medicine and 

Rehabilitation Clinics of North America, 

22(2), 261–275. 

Soman, S., Greenhalgh, D., & Palmieri, T. 

(2010). Review of burn injury research for the 

year of 2009. Journal of Burn Care & 

Research, 31(6), 836–848. 

Ullrich, P.M., Askay, SW., Patterson, D.R. 

(2009). Pain, depression, and physical 

functioning following burn injury. 

Rehabilitation Psychology, 54, 211–216. 

Wiechman, S.A. (2011). Psychosocial 

recovery, pain, and itch after burn injuries. 

In P. C. Esselman, K. J. Kowalske, & G. H. 

Kraft (Eds.), Burn Rehabilitation, Physical 

Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North 

America, 22(2), 327–345. 

Proposed Priority: 

The Assistant Secretary for Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services 

proposes a priority for the funding of 

Burn Model Systems centers (BMS 

Centers). The BMS Centers must 

provide comprehensive, 

multidisciplinary services to 

individuals with burn injury and 

conduct research that contributes to 

evidence-based rehabilitation 

interventions and clinical and practice 

guidelines. The BMS Centers must 

generate new knowledge that can be 

used to improve outcomes of 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
13584 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 7, 2012 / Notices 

individuals with burn injury in one or 

more domains identified in NIDRR’s 

currently approved Long Range Plan, 

published in the Federal Register on 

February 15, 2006 (71 FR 8166): Health 

and function, participation and 

community living, technology, and 

employment. Each BMS Center must 

contribute to this outcome by— 

(a) Providing a multidisciplinary 

system of rehabilitation care specifically 

designed to meet the needs of 

individuals with burn injury, including 

but not limited to physical, 

psychological, and community 

reintegration needs. The system must 

encompass a continuum of care, 

including emergency medical services, 

acute care services, acute medical 

rehabilitation services, and post-acute 

services; 

(b) Continuing the assessment of longterm outcomes of individuals with burn 

injury by enrolling at least 30 subjects 

per year into the BMS database, and 

collecting follow-up data on all subjects 

enrolled in the database at 6 months, 

and at 1, 2, 5, and 10 years post injury 

(as is being done in the current grant 

cycle) and extending the assessment to 

every five years thereafter, following 

established protocols for the collection 

of enrollment and follow-up data on 

subjects; 

Note: BMS Centers will be funded at 

varying amounts up to the maximum award 

based on the numbers of BMS database 

participants from whom BMS Centers must 

collect follow-up data. BMS Centers that 

have previously been BMS grantees with 

large numbers of database participants will 

receive more funding within the specified 

range than BMS Centers with fewer 

participants, as determined by NIDRR after 

applicants are selected for funding. 

Applicants must include in their budgets 

specific estimates of their costs for follow-up 

data collection. Funding will be determined 

individually for each successful applicant, 

up to the maximum allowed, based upon the 

documented workload associated with the 

follow-up data collection, other costs of the 

grant, and the overall budget of the research 

project. 

(c) Proposing and conducting at least 

one, but no more than two, site-specific 

research projects to test innovative 

approaches to treating burn injury or to 

assess outcomes of individuals with 

burn injury. Site-specific research 

projects must focus on outcomes in one 

or more domains identified in the Plan: 

health and function, community living 

and participation, technology, and 

employment; 

Note: Applicants who propose more than 

two site-specific research projects will be 

disqualified. Site-specific research projects 

may include collaborating entities as needed 

for execution of the research project. 

(d) Coordinating with the NIDRRfunded Model Systems Knowledge 

Translation Center (MSKTC; http:// 

www.msktc.org/) to provide scientific 

results and information for 

dissemination to clinical and consumer 

audiences; 

(e) Spending $5,000 of its total budget 

toward the costs of a state-of-the-science 

conference, which will be planned and 

executed with input and participation 

by the BMS Centers; 

(f) Addressing the needs of 

individuals with burn injuries, 

including individuals from one or more 

traditionally underserved populations; 

and 

(g) Ensuring that the input of 

individuals with burn injuries is used to 

shape BMS research activities. 

Types of Priorities: 

When inviting applications for a 

competition using one or more 

priorities, we designate the type of each 

priority as absolute, competitive 

preference, or invitational through a 

notice in the Federal Register. The 

effect of each type of priority follows: 

Absolute priority: Under an absolute 

priority, we consider only applications 

that meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3)). 

Competitive preference priority: 

Under a competitive preference priority, 

we give competitive preference to an 

application by (1) awarding additional 

points, depending on the extent to 

which the application meets the priority 

(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting 

an application that meets the priority 

over an application of comparable merit 

that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(2)(ii)). 

Invitational priority: Under an 

invitational priority, we are particularly 

interested in applications that meet the 

priority. However, we do not give an 

application that meets the invitational 

priority a preference over other 

applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)). 

Final Priority: 

We will announce the final priority in 

a notice in the Federal Register. We will 

determine the final priority after 

considering responses to this notice and 

other information available to the 

Department. This notice does not 

preclude us from proposing additional 

priorities, requirements, definitions, or 

selection criteria, subject to meeting 

applicable rulemaking requirements. 

Note: This notice does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we choose 

to use this priority, we invite applications 

through a notice in the Federal Register. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Secretary must determine whether this 

regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and, 

therefore, subject to the requirements of 

the Executive order and subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866 defines a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as an action likely to 

result in a rule that may— 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more, or 

adversely affect a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local or Tribal governments or 

communities in a material way (also 

referred to as an ‘‘economically 

significant’’ rule); 

(2) Create serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

stated in the Executive order. 

This proposed regulatory action is not 

a significant regulatory action subject to 

review by OMB under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. 

We have also reviewed this regulatory 

action under Executive Order 13563, 

which supplements and explicitly 

reaffirms the principles, structures, and 

definitions governing regulatory review 

established in Executive Order 12866. 

To the extent permitted by law, 

Executive Order 13563 requires that an 

agency— 

(1) Propose or adopt regulations only 

on a reasoned determination that their 

benefits justify their costs (recognizing 

that some benefits and costs are difficult 

to quantify); 

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the 

least burden on society, consistent with 

obtaining regulatory objectives and 

taking into account—among other things 

and to the extentpracticable—the costs 

of cumulative regulations; 

(3) In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, select those 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety, 

and other advantages; distributive 

impacts; and equity); 

(4) To the extent feasible, specify 

performance objectives, rather than the 

behavior or manner of compliance a 

regulated entity must adopt; and 

(5) Identify and assess available 

alternatives to direct regulation, 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 7, 2012 / Notices 13585 

including economic incentives—such as 

user fees or marketable permits—to 

encourage the desired behavior, or 

provide information that enables the 

public to make choices. 

Executive Order 13563 also requires 

an agency ‘‘to use the best available 

techniques to quantify anticipated 

present and future benefits and costs as 

accurately as possible.’’ The Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB has emphasized that these 

techniques may include ‘‘identifying 

changing future compliance costs that 

might result from technological 

innovation or anticipated behavioral 

changes.’’ 

We are taking this regulatory action 

only on a reasoned determination that 

its benefits justify its costs. In choosing 

among alternative regulatory 

approaches, we selected those 

approaches that maximize net benefits. 

Based on the analysis that follows, the 

Department believes that this proposed 

priority is consistent with the principles 

in Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action would not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

associated with this regulatory action 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

The benefits of the Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Projects and 

Centers Programs have been well 

established over the years in that similar 

projects have been completed 

successfully. This proposed priority 

would generate new knowledge through 

research and development. Another 

benefit of this proposed priority is that 

the establishment of new DRRPs would 

improve the lives of individuals with 

disabilities. The new DRRP would 

generate, disseminate, and promote the 

use of new information that would 

improve the options for individuals 

with disabilities to perform activities of 

their choice in the community. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is not subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or computer diskette) 

by contacting the Grants and Contracts 

Services Team, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC 

20202–2550. Telephone: (202) 245– 

7363. If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll 

free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: March 2, 2012. 

Alexa Posny, 

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2012–5568 Filed 3–6–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Electricity Subsector Cybersecurity 

Risk Management Process Guideline 

AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery 

and Energy Reliability, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of public comment. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) invites public comment on DOE’s 

intent to publish the Electricity 

Subsector Cybersecurity Risk 

Management Process guideline. The 

guideline describes a risk management 

process that is targeted to the specific 

needs of electricity sector organizations. 

The objective of the guideline is to build 

upon existing guidance and 

requirements to develop a flexible risk 

management process tuned to the 

diverse missions, equipment, and 

business needs of the electric power 

industry. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before Thursday, April 5, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be 

submitted to Matthew Light, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy 

Reliability, 1000 Independence Ave. 

SW., Washington, DC 20585; Fax 202– 

586–2623; Email: 

matthew.light@hq.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Request for additional information 

should be directed to Matthew Light at 

matthew.light@hq.doe.gov, phone 202– 

316–5115. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE 

invites public comment on DOE’s intent 

to publish a guidance document 

entitled: Electricity Subsector 

Cybersecurity Risk Management Process 

Guideline. The primary goal of this 

guideline is to describe a risk 

management process that is targeted to 

the specific needs of electricity sector 

organizations. The objective of the 

guideline is to build upon existing 

guidance and requirements to develop a 

flexible risk management process tuned 

to the diverse missions, equipment, and 

business needs of the electric power 

industry. 

The Electricity Subsector 

Cybersecurity Risk Management Process 

guideline was developed by the DOE, in 

collaboration with the National Institute 

of Standards and Technology (NIST), 

the North American Electric Reliability 

Corporation (NERC), and representatives 

from both the public and private sector. 

The NIST Special Publication 800–39, 

Managing Information Security Risk 

provides the foundational methodology 

for this document. 

The Electricity Sector Cybersecurity 

Risk Management Process Guideline is 

available for review at: http://energy.

gov/oe/downloads/draft-cybersecurityrisk-management-process-rmpguideline. 

Authority: Homeland Security 

Presidential Directive 7 (HSPD–7). 

Issued at Washington, DC, on March 1, 

2012. 

Patricia A. Hoffman, 

Assistant Secretary, Electricity Delivery and 

Energy Reliability. 

[FR Doc. 2012–5512 Filed 3–6–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Project No. 14364–000] 

Three Sisters Irrigation District; Notice 

of Application Accepted for Filing and 

Soliciting Comments, Motions To 

Intervene, Protests, 

Recommendations, and Terms and 

Conditions 

Take notice that the following 

hydroelectric application has been filed 

with the Commission and is available 

for public inspection: 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES