47770 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 197 / Friday, October 13, 2017 / Notices 

1The Supreme Court of the United States interim 

order in connection with an application for an 

injunction in the pending case of Wheaton College 

v. Burwell (the ‘‘Wheaton order’’). 2See, e.g., 29 CFR 2520.104b–3(d). 

Wheaton order.1 Specifically, the final 

regulations continued to allow eligible 

organizations to notify an issuer or third 

party administrator using EBSA Form 

700, as set forth in the July 2013 final 

regulations. In addition, the final 

regulations permitted an alternative 

process, consistent with the Wheaton 

order, under which an eligible 

organization could notify the Secretary 

of HHS that it will not act as the plan 

administrator or claims administrator 

with respect to, or contribute to the 

funding of, coverage of all or a subset of 

contraceptive services. The notification 

must include information sufficient to 

identify the plan, plan type (including 

whether it is a church plan within the 

meaning of ERISA section 3(33)), and 

the identity and mailing addresses of 

any third party administrators. 

The 2017 interim final rules amend 

the Departments’ July 2015 final 

regulations to expand the exemption to 

include additional entities (any kind of 

non-governmental employer) and 

persons that object based on religious 

beliefs or moral convictions objecting to 

contraceptive or sterilization coverage, 

and by making the accommodation 

compliance process optional for eligible 

organizations instead of mandatory. 

These rules leave in place HRSA’s 

discretion to continue to require 

contraceptive and sterilization coverage 

where no objection exists, and to the 

extent that PHS Act section 2713 

otherwise applies. With respect to 

employers, the expanded exemption in 

these rules covers employers that have 

religious beliefs or moral convictions 

objecting to coverage of all or a subset 

of contraceptives or sterilization and 

related patient education and 

counseling. While the rules cover any 

kind of non-governmental employer but, 

for the sake of clarity, these regulations 

also include an illustrative list of 

employers whose objection qualifies the 

plans they sponsor for an exemption. 

Consistent with the current 

exemption, exempt entities will not be 

required to comply with a selfcertification process. Although exempt 

entities do not need to file notices or 

certifications of their exemption, 

existing rules governing health plans 

require that a plan document specify 

what is and is not covered. Thus where 

an exemption applies and all or a subset 

of contraception is omitted from a plan’s 

coverage, the plan document and 

otherwise applicable ERISA 

disclosures 2 should reflect the omission 

of coverage. This is not an added 

obligation, but it will serve to help 

provide notice of what plans do and do 

not cover. 

As in the previous rule, institutions of 

higher education that arrange student 

health insurance coverage will continue 

to be treated similar to the way 

employers are treated for the purposes 

of such plans being exempt. These 

interim final rules also exempt group 

health plans sponsored by an entity 

other than an employer, and health 

insurance issuers in the group and 

individual market, that object based on 

religious beliefs or moral convictions to 

coverage of contraceptives or 

sterilization. The rules also exempt 

health coverage offered or provided to 

certain individuals with their own 

religious or moral objections. 

Employers that under the previous 

rules had used the accommodation 

process, but can now be exempt may 

now choose to revoke their use of the 

accommodation process, but in order to 

do so they must provide participants 

and beneficiaries written notice of such 

revocation as soon as possible. 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) approved the amendments to 

EBSA Form 700 required as a revision 

to OMB Control Number 1210–0150 

under the emergency procedures for 

review and clearance in accordance 

with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 

35) and 5 CFR 1320.13. OMB’s approval 

of the revision currently are schedule to 

expire on September 30, 2018. In an 

effort to consolidate the number of 

information collection requests, the 

Department is combining the burden 

from 1210–0152 into 1210–0150. Once 

this ICR is approved the Department 

will discontinue. 1210–0152. 

II. Current Actions 

This notice requests public comment 

pertaining to the Department’s request 

for extension of OMB’s approval of its 

revision to EBSA Form 700. After 

considering comments received in 

response to this notice, the Department 

intends to submit an ICR to OMB for 

continuing approval. Changes to the 

current ICR include an expansion to the 

number of firms that qualify for the 

exemption, making the accommodation 

process optional, and requiring firms 

that are revoking their current 

accommodation to send a notice to plan 

participants and beneficiaries. The 

Department notes that an agency may 

not conduct or sponsor, and a person is 

not required to respond to, an 

information collection unless it displays 

a valid OMB control number. A 

summary of the ICR and the current 

burden estimates follows: 

Type of Review: Revised Collection. 

Agency: DOL–EBSA. 

Title: Coverage of Certain Preventive 

Services under the Affordable Care 

Act—Private Sector. 

OMB Numbers: 1210–0150. 

Affected Public: Private Sector—Not 

for profit and religious organizations; 

businesses or other for profits. 

Total Respondents: 114 (combined 

with HHS total is 227). 

Total Responses: 274,628 (combined 

with HHS total is 549,255). 

Frequency of Response: On occasion. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 181 (combined with HHS total is 

362 hours). 

Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: 

$68,662 (combined with HHS total is 

$137,325). 

III. Desired Focus of Comments 

The Department of Labor 

(Department) is particularly interested 

in comments that: 

• Evaluate 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; 

• Evaluate 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; 

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity 

of the information to be collected; and 

• Minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on those who are to respond, 

including through the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or other 

forms of information technology, e.g., by 

permitting electronic submissions of 

responses. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and/or 

included in the ICR for OMB approval 

of the extension of the information 

collection; they will also become a 

matter of public record. 

Dated: October 5, 2017. 

Joseph S. Piacentini, 

Director, Office of Policy and Research, 

Employee Benefits Security Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2017–22064 Filed 10–12–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–29–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Bureau of Labor Statistics 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

Department of Labor. 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 197 / Friday, October 13, 2017 / Notices 47771 

ACTION: Notice of solicitation of 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Labor 

through the Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(BLS) is currently soliciting comments 

for the second major revision of the 

Occupational Injury and Illness 

Classification System (OIICS), current 

version 2.01. The last major revision 

occurred in 2011. BLS is responsible for 

the development and publication of 

occupational injury, illness, and fatality 

data. These data are compiled by the 

Survey of Occupational Injuries and 

Illnesses (SOII) and the Census of Fatal 

Occupational Injuries (CFOI) programs. 

The OIICS is used to classify certain 

case characteristics associated with the 

nonfatal and fatal work injury cases 

received by the programs. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted to the office listed in the 

Addresses section of this notice on or 

before February 1, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Christen 

Byler, Office of Safety, Health and 

Working Conditions, Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, Room 3180, 2 Massachusetts 

Avenue NE., Washington, DC 20212 or 

by email to: OIICS-R@bls.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christen Byler, Office of Safety, Health 

and Working Conditions, Bureau of 

Labor Statistics, telephone number: 

202–691–6252, or by email at: 

Byler.Christen@bls.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Occupational Injury and Illness 

Classification System is used to code 

case characteristics of nonfatal injuries 

and illnesses reported in the SOII and 

fatal injuries reported in CFOI. Cases are 

classified according to five code 

structures that describe the injury or 

illness and how it occurred: 

• Nature of Injury or Illness: 

Describes the physical characteristics of 

the injury or illness. 

• Part of Body Affected: Identifies the 

part of the body directly affected by the 

nature. 

• Source of Injury or Illness: 

Identifies the object or substance that 

directly inflicted the injury or illness. 

• Event or Exposure: Describes the 

manner in which the injury or illness 

was inflicted by the source. 

• Secondary Source: Identifies other 

objects or substances, if any, that 

contributed to the event or exposure. 

The same code list is used for both 

source and secondary source. 

The case characteristic classification 

structures are hierarchical with four 

levels of detail to facilitate the 

aggregation of information and to 

accommodate both variations in detail 

available on reporting forms and the 

needs of data users. For example, one 

user may wish to look at data for 

injuries involving all trucks (Source 

code 825); whereas, another user may be 

interested only in cases involving 

tractor trailer trucks (Source code 8254). 

With the 2011 adoption of OIICS 2.0, 

the numeric hierarchy also became an 

order of precedence within each of the 

characteristics, designating which codes 

should be given priority when multiple 

codes could be appropriate within a 

given case. 

Each case characteristic structure is 

comprised of the following: 

• Rules of precedence: Designates 

which division within the coded case 

characteristic, Event or Exposure, is to 

take precedence when more than one 

code might be applicable within the 

case. 

• Rules of selection: Defines which 

codes should be used and how different 

coded case characteristics interact with 

each other, specifically event/source/ 

secondary source and nature/part. 

• Code descriptions: Provides 

detailed definitions for individual code 

categories and often gives examples of 

types of cases that are included or 

excluded from the category. 

• Complete code list: Includes the 

codes and associated titles by 

themselves without the descriptions. 

• Alphabetical indices. 

The original Occupational Injury and 

Illness Classification System (OIICS) 

was released in December 1992. It was 

developed by the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics with input from data users and 

states participating in the BLS 

Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) 

Federal/State cooperative programs. It 

was ultimately based on the American 

National Standards Institute (ANSI) 

Z16.2–1962, Method of Recording Basic 

Facts Relating to the Nature and 

Occurrence of Work Injuries, revised 

1969. In addition, certain portions are 

based on the International Statistical 

Classification of Diseases and Related 

Health Problems, 9th Revision, Clinical 

Modification (ICD–9 CM), which is 

widely used in the medical community. 

After its adoption in 1992, OIICS was 

approved for use as the American 

National Standard for Information 

Management for Occupational Safety 

and Health in 1995 (ANSI Z16.2–1995). 

In addition to the BLS occupational 

safety and health statistics program, the 

OIICS is used by several state workers’ 

compensation agencies, the National 

Institute for Occupational Safety and 

Health, and other organizations. 

In September 2007, the OIICS 

underwent a minor update to 

incorporate various interpretations and 

corrections. A major revision followed 

resulting in OIICS version 2.0 with an 

additional minor update culminating in 

version 2.01. Version 2.0 was adopted 

with reference year 2011 and was 

considered a major break in series. 

Included were major changes to rules of 

selection, new code births, as well as 

the introduction of rules of precedence 

designated by the numeric hierarchy of 

the structures. The current version of 

the OIICS (2.01) is available on the BLS 

Web site at http://www.bls.gov/iif/ 

oshoiics.htm. 

II. Current Action 

A second major revision of OIICS was 

initiated in spring 2017. This revision is 

intended to update the classification 

system to: 

• Include new or emerging conditions 

or workplace hazards that could 

potentially result from an incident or 

exposure in the workplace. 

• Provide for data aggregations not 

available with the current OIICS. 

• Explore the need for new or 

expanded coding structures to capture 

other case characteristics, for example 

worker activity. 

• Improve and clarify order of 

precedence and rules of selection. 

• Improve the usability and layout of 

the OIICS manual. 

In addition, BLS will review the 

International Statistical Classification of 

Diseases and Related Health Problems 

10th Revision (ICD–10), new ANSI 

standards, international program 

comparisons, and other comparable 

coding structures to optimize the 

capture of actionable insights for safety 

intervention from BLS occupational 

safety and health data. 

III. Desired Focus of Comments 

Comments and recommendations are 

requested from the public on the 

following aspects of the OIICS: 

• The layout and organization of the 

manual. 

• The order of precedence and rules 

of selection of the five case 

characteristics (Nature of Injury or 

Illness, Part of Body Affected, Source of 

Injury or Illness, Secondary Source, 

Event or Exposure). 

• Potential new coded characteristics 

(worker activity, work environment 

exposures, location, etc.). 

• The code categories, including 

recommendations for additional 

categories, and for merging or deleting 

existing categories. (Please provide 

justifications where possible.) 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
47772 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 197 / Friday, October 13, 2017 / Notices 

• The descriptions of the code 

categories, including the lists of 

inclusions and exclusions. 

• Alphabetical indices and other 

desired tools for coding assistance. 

• Any other thoughts on the coding 

system. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 5th day of 

October 2017. 

Kimberley Hill, 

Chief, Division of Management Systems. 

[FR Doc. 2017–22188 Filed 10–12–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–24–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration 

[Docket No. OSHA–2017–0010] 

Nevada State Plan; Change in Level of 

Federal Enforcement: Private-Sector 

Employment on Military Bases 

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), Department of 

Labor. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This document gives notice of 

OSHA’s approval of a change to the 

state of Nevada’s Occupational Safety 

and Health State Plan reinstating federal 

OSHA enforcement authority over 

private-sector employment on military 

facilities and bases in Nevada. The 

Nevada State Plan currently has 

coverage over some private-sector 

contractors on military bases. Therefore, 

OSHA amends the Nevada State Plan’s 

coverage to reflect this change in the 

level of federal enforcement. 

DATES: Applicable Date: October 13, 

2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

press inquiries: Francis Meilinger, 

Director, OSHA Office of 

Communications: Telephone: (202) 693– 

1999; email: meilinger.francis2@dol.gov. 

For general and technical 

information: Douglas J. Kalinowski, 

Director, OSHA Directorate of 

Cooperative and State Programs: 

Telephone: (202) 693–2200; email: 

kalinowski.doug@dol.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 18 

of the Occupational Safety and Health 

Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. 667 (OSH Act), 

provides that states that assume 

responsibility for developing and 

enforcing their own occupational safety 

and health standards may do so by 

submitting and obtaining federal 

approval of a State Plan. State Plan 

approval occurs in stages which include 

initial approval under section 18(c) of 

the OSH Act and, ultimately, final 

approval under section 18(e). 

The Nevada State Plan was initially 

approved under Section 18(c) of the 

OSH Act on January 4, 1974 (39 FR 

1009). The Nevada State Plan is 

administered by the Department of 

Business and Industry, Division of 

Industrial Relations, Nevada 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (Nevada OSHA). On 

April 18, 2000, OSHA announced the 

final approval of the Nevada State Plan 

pursuant to section 18(e) and amended 

29 CFR part 1952 to reflect the Assistant 

Secretary’s decision (65 FR 20742). As 

a result, federal OSHA relinquished its 

enforcement authority with regard to 

occupational safety and health issues 

covered by the Nevada State Plan. 

Federal OSHA retained its authority 

over safety and health in the private 

sector over maritime employment; 

contract workers, and contractoroperated facilities engaged in U.S. 

Postal Service mail operations; 

contractors and subcontractors on land 

under exclusive federal jurisdiction; 

employment on Indian Land; and any 

hazard, industry, geographical area, 

operation, or facility over which the 

state is unable to effectively exercise 

jurisdiction for reasons not related to 

the required performance or structure of 

the plan. 

To establish military facilities, the 

Federal Government may privately 

purchase or lease land, as any other 

entity would, and in those cases a State 

Plan can cover private-sector 

occupational safety and health on such 

land. In other cases, the Federal 

Government may ask a State to cede the 

land to the Federal Government, in 

which case the latter obtains 

jurisdiction over it; however, a State 

may retain some jurisdiction. Thus, the 

determination whether the State Plan or 

federal OSHA covers private-sector 

employers on military facilities can be 

complicated. For example, military 

facilities in Nevada sometimes 

encompass both land where jurisdiction 

has been ceded and land privately 

owned by the Federal Government 

(though federal OSHA covers all federal 

civilian employees on military 

facilities). This situation has created 

confusion as to whether federal OSHA 

or the Nevada State Plan covers privatesector employers on a military facility, 

and is a resource-intensive inquiry. 

Thus, the Nevada State Plan requested 

on December 14, 2016, that federal 

OSHA resume enforcement authority 

over all private-sector employment on 

military facilities and bases. After 

discussions between federal OSHA and 

Nevada OSHA, both agencies agreed 

that federal coverage of all private-sector 

contractors on military bases was the 

best solution to ensure prompt and 

effective protection to workers on 

military bases in Nevada. 

Accordingly, notice is hereby given of 

the change in federal enforcement 

authority over private-sector contractors 

on military bases in Nevada, and 

coverage is transferred from the Nevada 

State Plan to federal OSHA. 

Authority and Signature 

Loren Sweatt, Deputy Assistant 

Secretary of Labor for Occupational 

Safety and Health, U.S. Department of 

Labor, authorized the preparation of this 

notice. OSHA is issuing this notice 

under the authority specified by Section 

18 of the Occupational Safety and 

Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 667), 

Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 1–2012 

(77 FR 3912), and 29 CFR parts 1902, 

1953 and 1955. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on October 3, 

2017. 

Loren Sweatt, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for 

Occupational Safety and Health. 

[FR Doc. 2017–22175 Filed 10–12–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Office of Workers’ Compensation 

Programs 

Division of Coal Mine Workers’ 

Compensation; Proposed Extension of 

Existing Collection; Comment Request 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Currently, the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is 

soliciting comments concerning the 

proposed collection: Representative 

Payee Report (CM–623), Representative 

Payee Report, Short Form (CM–623S) 

and Physician’s/Medical Officer’s 

Statement (CM–787). A copy of the 

proposed information collection request 

can be obtained by contacting the office 

listed below in the addresses section of 

this Notice. This program helps to 

ensure that requested data can be 

provided in the desired format, 

reporting burden (time and financial 

resources) is minimized, collection 

instruments are clearly understood, and 

the impact of collection requirements on 

respondents can be properly assessed. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted by December 12, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by mail, delivery service, or by hand to 

Ms. Yoon Ferguson, U.S. Department of 

Labor, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES