44816 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2017 / Notices 

findings, best practices, and lessons 

learned. The supported activity includes 

the production of the required 

interventions manual for the initiative 

documenting the ten intervention 

models employed by the demonstration 

sites in order to promote the future 

replication of the interventions by Ryan 

White HIV/AIDS Program recipients and 

other health care providers. Not issuing 

this award would severely reduce the 

impact of this initiative by limiting the 

analysis and dissemination of best 

practices and lessons learned to HIV 

providers serving these Latino/a 

subpopulations. This would weaken 

efforts to improve the health outcomes 

for Latinos/as living with HIV in the 

United States. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Adan Cajina, Chief, Demonstration 

Evaluation Branch, Office of Training 

and Capacity Development, Division of 

HIV Domestic Programs, HIV/AIDS 

Bureau, HRSA, 5600 Fishers Lane, 

09N108, Rockville, MD 20857, Phone: 

(301) 443–3180, Email: acajina@

hrsa.gov. 

Dated: September 19, 2017. 

George Sigounas, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2017–20541 Filed 9–25–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4165–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Health Resources and Services 

Administration 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation 

Program: List of Petitions Received 

AGENCY: Health Resources and Services 

Administration (HRSA), Department of 

Health and Human Services (HHS). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: HRSA is publishing this 

notice of petitions received under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation 

Program (the program), as required by 

the Public Health Service (PHS) Act, as 

amended. While the Secretary of HHS is 

named as the respondent in all 

proceedings brought by the filing of 

petitions for compensation under the 

Program, the United States Court of 

Federal Claims is charged by statute 

with responsibility for considering and 

acting upon the petitions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about requirements for 

filing petitions, and the Program in 

general, contact Lisa L. Reyes, Acting 

Clerk, United States Court of Federal 

Claims, 717 Madison Place NW., 

Washington, DC 20005, (202) 357–6400. 

For information on HRSA’s role in the 

Program, contact the Director, National 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 

5600 Fishers Lane, Room 08N146B, 

Rockville, MD 20857; (301) 443–6593, 

or visit our Web site at: http://

www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/ 

index.html. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

program provides a system of no-fault 

compensation for certain individuals 

who have been injured by specified 

childhood vaccines. Subtitle 2 of Title 

XXI of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C. 300aa– 

10 et seq., provides that those seeking 

compensation are to file a petition with 

the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and to 

serve a copy of the petition on the 

Secretary of HHS, who is named as the 

respondent in each proceeding. The 

Secretary has delegated this 

responsibility under the Program to 

HRSA. The Court is directed by statute 

to appoint special masters who take 

evidence, conduct hearings as 

appropriate, and make initial decisions 

as to eligibility for, and amount of, 

compensation. 

A petition may be filed with respect 

to injuries, disabilities, illnesses, 

conditions, and deaths resulting from 

vaccines described in the Vaccine Injury 

Table (the Table) set forth at 42 CFR 

100.3. This Table lists for each covered 

childhood vaccine the conditions that 

may lead to compensation and, for each 

condition, the time period for 

occurrence of the first symptom or 

manifestation of onset or of significant 

aggravation after vaccine 

administration. Compensation may also 

be awarded for conditions not listed in 

the Table and for conditions that are 

manifested outside the time periods 

specified in the Table, but only if the 

petitioner shows that the condition was 

caused by one of the listed vaccines. 

Section 2112(b)(2) of the PHS Act, 42 

U.S.C. 300aa–12(b)(2), requires that 

‘‘[w]ithin 30 days after the Secretary 

receives service of any petition filed 

under section 2111 the Secretary shall 

publish notice of such petition in the 

Federal Register.’’ Set forth below is a 

list of petitions received by HRSA on 

August 1, 2017, through August 31, 

2017. This list provides the name of 

petitioner, city and state of vaccination 

(if unknown then city and state of 

person or attorney filing claim), and 

case number. In cases where the Court 

has redacted the name of a petitioner 

and/or the case number, the list reflects 

such redaction. 

Section 2112(b)(2) also provides that 

the special master ‘‘shall afford all 

interested persons an opportunity to 

submit relevant, written information’’ 

relating to the following: 

1. The existence of evidence ‘‘that 

there is not a preponderance of the 

evidence that the illness, disability, 

injury, condition, or death described in 

the petition is due to factors unrelated 

to the administration of the vaccine 

described in the petition,’’ and 

2. Any allegation in a petition that the 

petitioner either: 

a. ‘‘[S]ustained, or had significantly 

aggravated, any illness, disability, 

injury, or condition not set forth in the 

Vaccine Injury Table but which was 

caused by’’ one of the vaccines referred 

to in the Table, or 

b. ‘‘[S]ustained, or had significantly 

aggravated, any illness, disability, 

injury, or condition set forth in the 

Vaccine Injury Table the first symptom 

or manifestation of the onset or 

significant aggravation of which did not 

occur within the time period set forth in 

the Table but which was caused by a 

vaccine’’ referred to in the Table. 

In accordance with Section 

2112(b)(2), all interested persons may 

submit written information relevant to 

the issues described above in the case of 

the petitions listed below. Any person 

choosing to do so should file an original 

and three (3) copies of the information 

with the Clerk of the U.S. Court of 

Federal Claims at the address listed 

above (under the heading FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT), with a copy to 

HRSA addressed to Director, Division of 

Injury Compensation Programs, 

Healthcare Systems Bureau, 5600 

Fishers Lane, 08N146B, Rockville, MD 

20857. The Court’s caption (Petitioner’s 

Name v. Secretary of HHS) and the 

docket number assigned to the petition 

should be used as the caption for the 

written submission. Chapter 35 of title 

44, United States Code, related to 

paperwork reduction, does not apply to 

information required for purposes of 

carrying out the program. 

Dated: September 19, 2017 

George Sigounas, 

Administrator. 

List of Petitions Filed 

1. Teresa Audino and David Audino on 

behalf of C. A., Vienna, Virginia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1033V 

2. Stephanie C. Savage, Greensboro, 

North Carolina 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1036V 

3. Alfred Wade, Jr. on behalf of Elaine 

D. Wade, Deceased, Wilmington, 

North Carolina 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1039V 

4. Tiffany S. Gaiter and Deverett S. 

Gaiter on behalf of Deverett S. Jr. 

Gaiter, Bay City, Michigan 

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2017 / Notices 44817 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1040V 

5. Larry Tomczak, Washington, District 

of Columbia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1041V 

6. Sergio Flores, Chula Vista, California 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1042V 

7. Kimberly Magro, Rockville, Maryland 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1043V 

8. Ruth Turner, Washington, District of 

Columbia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1044V 

9. Joseph Diaz, Washington, District of 

Columbia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1045V 

10. Robert Williams, Los Angeles, 

California 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1046V 

11. Joy Whittemore, Washington, 

District of Columbia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1047V 

12. Martha A. Boudreau, Marietta, 

Georgia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1048V 

13. Harry Robinson, Juneau, Alaska 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1050V 

14. Hazel Palm, Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1051V 

15. Kathy Reid, Royal Oak, Michigan 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1052V 

16. Steven Washington, Wilmington, 

Delaware 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1053V 

17. Beth Larrington, Leon, Iowa 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1054V 

18. Rosa Monzon, Hollywood, Florida 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1055V 

19. James T. Lawrence, Louisville, 

Kentucky 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1056V 

20. Steven Dingmann, Clearwater, 

Minnesota 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1058V 

21. Terra Rhea Varner, Ballentine, South 

Carolina 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1060V 

22. Michaelanne Graeff, St. Charles, 

Missouri 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1062V 

23. Robert Kissinger, Folsom, California 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1063V 

24. Leigh Ann Palmer, Portland, Oregon 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1067V 

25. Cheryl Desnick, Eden Prairie, 

Minnesota 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1071V 

26. Dana B. Strode, Spokane, 

Washington 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1072V 

27. Michael Wallace, Framingham, 

Massachusetts 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1074V 

28. Jennifer Gross, O’Fallon, Illinois 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1075V 

29. Marilynne Lesher, Lansdale, 

Pennsylvania 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1076V 

30. David Lans Stout, Jacksonville 

Beach, Florida 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1077V 

31. Kathryn Johnson, White Bear Lake, 

Minnesota 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1078V 

32. April J. Barr, Nashville, Indiana 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1079V 

33. Karen Aarons, Peekskill, New York 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1081V 

34. Douglas H. McElroy, Kernersville, 

North Carolina 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1083V 

35. Linda Baker on behalf of James 

Baker, Bluffton, South Carolina 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1085V 

36. Betty Jones, Atlanta, Georgia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1086V 

37. Lily Wells, Houston, Texas 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1087V 

38. Jane O. Witham, Springfield, 

Vermont 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1095V 

39. Simon Olschansky, Phoenix, 

Arizona 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1096V 

40. Stephen Kaiser, McPherson, Kansas 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1099V 

41. Claire B. Steinberger, New York, 

New York 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1101V 

42. Dustin Logan, Colorado Springs, 

Colorado 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1102V 

43. Ellen Stoler, Charleston, South 

Carolina 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1106V 

44. Jennifer Green, Prattville, Alabama 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1107V 

45. Leah Marsh and Jeremy Marsh on 

behalf of E. M., West Jordan, Utah 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1109V 

46. Kenneth Keith, San Diego, California 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1110V 

47. James Izuwa, Honolulu, Hawaii 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1111V 

48. Eileen Schmigel, Ridgecrest, 

California 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1112V 

49. Linda Kolacny, Junction City, 

Kansas 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1113V 

50. Kenneth Rickard, Redding, 

California 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1114V 

51. Sarah Snyder on behalf of S. S., 

Omaha, Nebraska 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1116V 

52. Daniel H. Trigoboff, Hamburg, New 

York 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1117V 

53. Katrina Marie Brusatto on behalf of 

Domingo Rafael Brusatto, 

Spanaway, Washington 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1118V 

54. Paisley A. Kauffmann, Minneapolis, 

Minnesota 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1119V 

55. Derek Saunders, McDonough, 

Georgia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1120V 

56. Heather Adams, Washington, 

District of Columbia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1121V 

57. Jeffrey Cobb and Kimberly Cobb on 

behalf of T. C., Panora, Iowa 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1123V 

58. Gary Helvig, Salem, Oregon 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1124V 

59. Thida Phann, Kent, Washington 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1125V 

60. Michael Bacotti, Washington, 

District of Columbia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1126V 

61. Joshua Bradley, Trenton, Georgia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1128V 

62. Doris DiPonziano, Cherry Hill, New 

Jersey 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1130V 

63. Aaron Tomsky, Princeton, 

Minnesota 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1132V 

64. Judy Barton and Jones Barton on 

behalf of E. B., Cary, North Carolina 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1133V 

65. Julie Bulow, Washington, District of 

Columbia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1134V 

66. Edgar C. Kisby, Egg Harbor 

Township, New Jersey 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1135V 

67. Carolyn Pierson, Roseburg, Oregon 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1136V 

68. Francine M. Skinner on behalf of 

H. S., Wilmington, North Carolina 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1137V 

69. Raquel Fournier, Winnetka, 

California 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1139V 

70. Cynthia S. Simon, St. Joseph, 

Missouri 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1140V 

71. Crystal Allen, Dallas, Texas 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1141V 

72. Linda Cartmel, Phoenix, Arizona 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1146V 

73. Jesse Lubin, Rockville Centre, New 

York 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1147V 

74. Ilya Ben, Middletown, New Jersey 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1149V 

75. Arthur F. Lute and Evan A. Lute on 

behalf of Arthur F. Lute, Imperial 

Beach, California 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1150V 

76. Carmen Murillo, Naperville, Illinois 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1152V 

77. Tara M. Lohman, Knoxville, 

Tennessee 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1153V 

78. Denise McGrath, Brooklyn, New 

York 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1154V 

79. Rebecca J. McDowell, Des Moines, 

Iowa 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1156V 

80. Nikko Cerrone, Farmington Hills, 

Michigan 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1158V 

81. Gloria Manuel, Phoenix, Arizona 

44818 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2017 / Notices 

1http://rhrc.umn.edu/wp-content/files_mf/ 

1491501904UMRHRCOBclosuresPolicyBrief.pdf. 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1159V 

82. Sandra Blevins, New York, New 

York 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1161V 

83. Michele Harding on behalf of W. J. 

H., Madison, Wisconsin 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1164V 

84. Jody Larsen, Seattle, Washington 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1165V 

85. Alexis Garner on behalf of K. T. G., 

Hyattsville, Maryland 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1166V 

86. Elvira Cruz, Englewood, New Jersey 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1167V 

87. Rasheedah Smith, Lawrenceville, 

Georgia 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1169V 

88. Carol Clark, Boston, Massachusetts 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1170V 

89. Lesa Marie Bowman-Harris, Salem, 

Oregon 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1172V 

90. Jennifer Claypool, Dayton, Nevada 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1176V 

91. Theresa Anderson, White Plains, 

New York 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1178V 

92. Maureen C. Clavio, Orland Park, 

Illinois 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1179V 

93. Ellen Honea, Beverly Hills, 

California 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1180V 

94. Jared Sipes, Jacksonville, North 

Carolina 

Court of Federal Claims No: 17–1181V 

[FR Doc. 2017–20540 Filed 9–25–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4165–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Health Resources and Services 

Administration 

Challenge Competition: Improving 

Remote Monitoring of Pregnancy 

AGENCY: Health Resources and Services 

Administration, Department of Health 

and Human Services. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Health Resources and 

Services Administration’s (HRSA’s) 

Maternal and Child Health Bureau 

(MCHB) announces a prize competition 

to support the development and testing 

of low-cost, scalable technology-based 

innovations to improve the ability of 

prenatal care providers to monitor the 

health and wellbeing of pregnant 

women remotely, especially women 

who live in rural and medicallyunderserved areas who have limited 

access to on-site prenatal care. 

The statutory authority for this 

challenge competition is Section 105 of 

the America COMPETES 

Reauthorization Act of 2010. 

This challenge, structured in three 

phases, will reach a diverse population 

of innovators and problem solvers 

including families, coders, public health 

experts, community leaders, individuals 

affiliated with academic institutions, 

research and development communities 

in the private sector, and others. 

All submissions will be evaluated; 

separate prizes will be awarded for each 

of the three phases below. 

Phase 1: Design 

Phase 2: Development and Small Scale 

Testing 

Phase 3: Scaling 

Estimated dates for each phase are as 

follows: 

Phase 1: Effective on January 2, 2018 

Phase 1 Submission Period Ends: 

January 31, 2018, 11:59 p.m. ET 

Phase 1 Judging Period: February 1– 

February 28, 2018 

Phase 1 Winners Announced: March 12, 

2018 

Phase 2 Begins: March 13, 2018 

Phase 2 Submission Period Ends: July 

11, 2018 

Phase 2 Judging Period: July 12–August 

12, 2018 

Phase 2 Winners Announced: August 

20, 2018 

Phase 3 Begins: August 21, 2018 

Phase 3 Submission Period Ends: 

February 21, 2019 

Phase 3 Winner Announced: March 1, 

2019 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jessie Buerlein, MSW, Office of Policy 

and Planning, MCHB, JBuerlein@

hrsa.gov, (301) 443–8931, or James 

Resnick, Office of the Associate 

Administrator, MCHB, JResnick@

hrsa.gov, (301) 443–3222. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

January 4, 2011, the America 

COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 

was signed into law allowing the use of 

challenges and prize competitions 

increasing agencies’ ability to promote 

and harness innovation. Competitions 

run by the federal government result in 

a number of benefits to the public, 

including the following: 

(a) Increasing the number and 

diversity of the individuals, teams, and 

organizations that are addressing a 

particular problem or challenge of 

national significance; 

(b) Improving the skills of the 

participants in the competition; and 

(c) Directing attention to new market 

opportunities and stimulating private 

sector investment. 

Subject of Challenge Competition 

In recent years, technological 

advances have improved the ability of 

healthcare providers to monitor their 

patients from afar. For example, 

wearable biosensors provide for the 

remote monitoring of patients, athletes, 

premature infants, children, psychiatric 

patients, people who need long-term 

care, the elderly, and people in rural 

and medically underserved areas. 

Telemedicine is improving access for 

patients, while smartphone apps are 

improving patients’ ability for self-care. 

At the same time, recent scientific 

advances around developmental origins 

of health and disease point to the 

important role that environmental 

exposures, nutrition, and stress play in 

maternal health and fetal programming. 

Remote, real-time, and more continuous 

monitoring of harmful environmental 

exposures, nutritional intake and energy 

expenditure, and stress and sleep, along 

with blood pressure, proteinuria, blood 

glucose, and fetal heart rate, has the 

potential to improve prenatal care 

quality and pregnancy outcomes while 

reducing healthcare costs. 

Recent trends in hospital closures in 

rural America also increase the need for 

technological innovations that support 

remote monitoring of pregnant women. 

Between 2004 and 2014, 179 rural 

counties (9 percent of all rural counties) 

lost access to in-county hospital 

obstetric services, and the percent of all 

rural counties in the U.S. that lacked 

hospital obstetric services increased 

from 45 to 54 percent, due to hospital 

and obstetric-unit closures.1 Many lowincome women, in both rural and urban 

communities, do not access prenatal 

care. Fully conflicting priorities such as 

work, childcare, and transportation 

make it difficult to make the 

approximately 15 visits to their 

provider’s office, which include critical 

medical assessments and instructions 

about self-care. This challenge is 

designed to make technology work for 

pregnant women, increase access, 

improve communications (between 

patients and providers and across 

providers), and empower pregnant 

women to take better care of themselves. 

This challenge will support the 

development and testing of low-cost, 

scalable technology-based innovations 

to improve the ability of prenatal care 

providers to monitor the health and 

wellbeing of pregnant women from afar 

(e.g., in their homes); utilizing 

technology to empower patients and 

providers with more complete and upto-date information. 

Key design features of the innovations 

should include: