Proposed Priorities; Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program, 21547-21551 [2012-8614]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21547-21551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8614]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Proposed Priorities; Disability and Rehabilitation Research 
Projects and Centers Program

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, 
Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Overview Information:
    CFDA Number: 84.133E-1 and 84.133E-3.
    Proposed Priorities--National Institute on Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR)--Disability and Rehabilitation Research 
Projects and Centers Program--Rehabilitation Engineering Research 
Centers (RERCs).
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 
Rehabilitative Services proposes two priorities for the Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by 
NIDRR. Specifically, this notice proposes two priorities for RERCs: 
Recreational Technologies and Exercise Physiology Benefiting 
Individuals with Disabilities (Proposed Priority (1) and Rehabilitation 
Robotics (Proposed Priority (2)). The Assistant Secretary may use one 
or more of these priorities 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 to use these priorities to improve 
rehabilitation services and outcomes for individuals with disabilities.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before May 10, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Address all comments about this notice to Marlene Spencer, 
U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 5133, 
Potomac Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2700.
    If you prefer to send your comments by email, use the following 
address: Marlene.Spencer@ed.gov. You must include the term ``Proposed 
Priorities for RERCs'' and the priority title in the subject line of 
your electronic message.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marlene Spencer. Telephone: (202) 245-
7532 or by email: Marlene.Spencer@ed.gov.
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice of proposed priorities 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: 
www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/nidrr/policy.html.
    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 two priorities that NIDRR intends to use for 
RERC competitions 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 awards for these 
priorities. 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

[[Page 21548]]

notice of final priorities, we urge you to identify clearly the 
specific proposed priority that each comment addresses.
    We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Order 12866 and its overall requirement of 
reducing regulatory burden that might result from these proposed 
priorities. 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 self-sufficiency 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).

Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Program (RERCs)

    The purpose of NIDRR's RERCs, which are funded through the 
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program, is 
to improve the effectiveness of services authorized under the 
Rehabilitation Act. It does so by conducting advanced engineering 
research, developing and evaluating innovative technologies, 
facilitating service delivery system changes, stimulating the 
production and distribution of new technologies and equipment in the 
private sector, and providing training opportunities. RERCs seek to 
solve rehabilitation problems and remove environmental barriers to 
improvements in employment, community living and participation, and 
health and function outcomes of individuals with disabilities.
    The general requirements for RERCs are set out in subpart D of 34 
part 350 (What Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Does the 
Secretary Assist?).
    Additional information on the RERC program can be found at: 
www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/.
    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(3).
    Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.

Proposed Priorities

    This notice contains two proposed priorities. Proposed Priority 1--
Recreational Technologies and Exercise Physiology Benefiting 
Individuals with Disabilities.

Background

    Individuals with disabilities engage in physical activity, or 
movement that enhances health, far less often than individuals without 
disabilities, despite the consistent evidence indicating the benefits 
of regular physical activity for their health and well-being (Institute 
of Medicine, 2007). Environmental barriers, such as inaccessible 
facilities, equipment, and recreational programs, continue to limit 
participation in physical and recreational activities among individuals 
with disabilities. Another factor impeding more engagement in physical 
activity among this population is limited knowledge about safe and 
appropriate levels of exercise. New knowledge in this area could be 
used to guide clinicians, other practitioners, and individuals with 
disabilities as they make decisions about optimal levels of 
participation in physical and recreational activities.
    While modifications to recreational facilities and equipment, such 
as the addition of swing-away seats to allow use from a wheelchair or 
the addition of braille instructions for the equipment, are becoming 
more common, these modifications are not universally available. 
Inaccessibility of recreational equipment and environments remains a 
primary barrier to participation in physical activities (Kailes, 2011). 
In addition to modifying existing facilities and equipment, there are 
novel recreational technologies that need to be tested for use by 
individuals with disabilities. For example, virtual reality (VR) and 
body movement tracking video-game technologies offer an emerging and 
highly promising method for promoting, monitoring, and supporting 
greater participation in physical activity by individuals with 
disabilities.
    For those individuals with disabilities who do engage in physical 
activity, there is little evidence about the amount of physical 
activity and energy expenditure required to promote health and function 
and prevent secondary conditions (Rimmer, Chen, McCubbin, Drum, 
Peterson, 2010). The development of new methods and techniques or 
adaptation of existing technologies that can estimate the intensity and 
frequency of physical activity (e.g., pedometers, accelerometers, and 
data-logging technologies) could be an effective means of promoting 
health and function for specific disability populations (Hiremath & 
Ding, 2011).
    For these reasons, NIDRR seeks to fund research and development 
activities that will facilitate equitable access to, and safe use of, 
recreational equipment, facilities, and recreational programs, and that 
will increase physical health and reduce secondary conditions 
associated with disability and sedentary lifestyle.

References

    Hiremath SV, Ding D. (2011). Regression equations for RT3 
activity monitors to estimate energy expenditure in manual 
wheelchair users. Conference Proceedings IEEE Engineering in 
Medicine and Biology Society. Aug; 2011:7348-51.

    Institute of Medicine. (2007). Adequacy of Evidence for Physical 
Activity Guidelines Development: Workshop summary. Washington, DC: The 
National Academies Press.
    Kailes, J.I. (2011). Using a fitness center does not have to be an 
exercise in frustration: Tips for people with mobility and visual 
disabilities. Retrieved January 25, 2012, from https://www.ncpad.org/programming/fact_sheet.php?sheet=812&view=all&print=yes.
    Rimmer, J.H., Chen, M.D., McCubbin, J.A., Drum, C., Peterson, J. 
(2010). Exercise intervention research on persons with disabilities: 
What we know and where we need to go. American Journal of Physical 
Medicine & Rehabilitation. 89(3): 249-63.
    Rimmer, J.H., Hsieh, K., Graham, B.C., Gerber, B.S., Gray-Stanley, 
J.A. (2010). Barrier removal in increasing physical activity levels in 
obese African American women with disabilities. Journal of Womens 
Health. 19(10): 1869-76.

[[Page 21549]]

    Proposed Priority 2--Rehabilitation Robotics

Background

    Individuals working in the field of rehabilitation robotics develop 
robotic systems that assist persons who have a disability that affects 
object manipulation, mobility, and cognitive functions, or that provide 
therapy for persons seeking to improve physical functions (Van der Loos 
& Reinkensmeyer, 2008). Advances in assistance and therapy robotics can 
be used to improve outcomes of individuals with disabilities in one or 
more major life domains identified in NIDRR's currently approved Long 
Range Plan, published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2006 (71 
FR 8165): health and function, community living and participation, and 
employment.
    Assistance robots generally fall into three categories: Those that 
provide assistance with object manipulation, mobility, or cognition. 
Examples of assistance robots include manipulator arms, wheelchairs 
with semi-autonomous navigation assistance, and cognitive aids that, 
for example, respond to sound, light, and contact to facilitate social 
interaction with children with autism and elderly adults with dementia 
(Van der Loos & Reinkensmeyer, 2008). There are a number of challenges 
associated with the design and widespread use of assistance robots for 
individuals with disabilities. For example, assistance robots typically 
need to be personalized to meet the specific needs, circumstances, and 
functional abilities of the individuals with disabilities using them. 
This need for individualization places practical limits on the design, 
marketing, and widespread distribution of these technological 
solutions. Another challenge is ensuring the safety of individuals who 
use assistance robots, while maintaining the assistance robots' 
autonomy and optimal utility to the user (Van der Loos & Reinkensmeyer, 
2008).
    Although current assistance robots show promise in providing 
individuals with disabilities greater independence and more choice in 
rehabilitation therapies, new advances in rehabilitation robotics are 
needed to optimize their value and utility. For example, robotic 
manipulator arms can be enhanced to increase the speed and strength of 
the arm, while monitoring and adjusting the strength of the end 
component of the robotic arm, known as the end effector or end of arm 
tool (EOAT). With this enhancement, the manipulated objects are not 
crushed by the EOAT. Also, electric powered wheelchairs could adopt 
technologies from mobile robots in order to provide more intuitive 
operation with less user vigilance and strain. This could include 
integrated sensors for natural obstacle detection and avoidance, 
docking or securing the wheelchair to a floor, and navigation 
assistance. In addition, there is a need for more research and 
development on robotic assistance aids for children and adults with 
cognitive impairments.
    Therapy robots generally aid in rehabilitation therapies for both 
the upper and lower extremities of individuals with a neurological 
disability, such as a stroke or spinal cord injury. Therapy robots can 
provide therapy over long periods of time, make precise measurements of 
therapeutic physical interventions to a degree not easily matched in 
other types of therapies, and provide exercises that a physical 
therapist cannot (Emken & Reinkensmeyer, 2005; Patton, Phillips-
Stoykov, Stojakovich, Mussa-Ivaldi, 2006).
    Currently, therapy robots are found only in large medical and 
rehabilitation centers. There is a need to simplify, downsize, and 
develop home- and community-based robotic systems to allow safe, low-
cost access to such therapy outside of large rehabilitation centers. 
Therapy robots can help extend the therapist's clinical capacity into 
the community clinic and the home while allowing greater access to 
rehabilitation services for individuals with disabilities. For example, 
therapy robots could be linked to telerehabilitation portals to allow 
therapists to work remotely with patients in home and community-clinic 
settings (McCue, Fairman, Pramuka, 2010).
    The technology for robotics has made great advances in the last 
decade. Motors are now lighter and more powerful. Sensors are better 
and less expensive and batteries are greatly improved. These factors 
should help to facilitate the continuing growth of rehabilitation 
robotics, especially for wearable or lighter-weight robots. 
Accordingly, NIDRR seeks to fund an RERC that evaluates the efficacy of 
rehabilitation robotics and researches and develops innovative 
technologies and techniques to improve the current state of the science 
and usability of rehabilitation robotics for individuals with 
disabilities.

References

    Emken, J. & Reinkensmeyer, D. (2005). Robot-enhanced motor 
learning: Accelerating internal model formation during locomotion by 
transient dynamic amplification, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems 
and Rehabilitation Engineering, 99, 1-7.
    McCue M, Fairman A, Pramuka M. (2010). Enhancing quality of life 
through telerehabilitation. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 
Clinics of North America, 21(1): 195-205.
    Patton, J.L., Phillips-Stoykov, M.E., Stojakovich, M., Mussa-
Ivaldi, F.A. (2006). Evaluation of robotic training forces that 
either enhance or reduce error in chronic hemiparetic stroke 
survivors. Experimental Brain Research, 168, 368-383.
    Van der Loos, M. & Reinkensmeyer, D.J. (2008). Rehabilitation 
and Health Care Robotics. In: Springer Handbook of Robotics. 
Siciliano, Bruno; Khatib, Oussama (Eds.)

Proposed Priorities

    The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services proposes the following priorities for the establishment of (a) 
a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Recreational 
Technologies and Exercise Physiology Benefiting Individuals with 
Disabilities; and (b) an RERC on Rehabilitation Robotics. Within its 
designated priority research area, each RERC will focus on innovative 
technological solutions, new knowledge, and concepts that will improve 
the lives of individuals with disabilities.

(a) RERC on Recreational Technologies and Exercise Physiology 
Benefiting Individuals With Disabilities (Proposed Priority 1)

    Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate 
innovative technologies and strategies that will enhance recreational 
and physical activity opportunities for individuals with disabilities. 
The RERC must research, develop, or adapt technologies to capture, 
monitor, and analyze energy expenditure levels in individuals with 
disabilities as they perform different recreational and physical 
activities, so that clinicians, researchers and individuals with 
disabilities can better estimate the intensity and frequency of 
physical activity required to promote health and function within 
specific disability populations. In addition, the RERC must facilitate 
access to, and use of, recreational and physical activity equipment, 
facilities, and recreational programs, that improve physical health and 
reduce debilitating secondary conditions associated with disability and 
sedentary lifestyle through such means as collaboration and 
communication with relevant stakeholders, technical assistance, and 
technology transfer, in addition to research and the development and 
testing of innovations.

[[Page 21550]]

(b) RERC on Rehabilitation Robotics (Proposed Priority 2)

    Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate 
innovative technologies and strategies for the safe use of, and 
expanded access to, rehabilitation robotics by individuals with 
disabilities. This RERC must engage in research and development 
activities in the areas of both assistance and therapy robots for use 
by individuals with disabilities. The RERC must generate new knowledge 
and products that can improve the usability and utility of assistance 
robots so that they are more efficient and effective facilitators of 
independence and community participation. The RERC must also generate 
new knowledge and products that expand the use of therapy robots beyond 
large rehabilitation centers and into more community and home-based 
settings.

Requirements Applicable to Both Proposed Priorities

    Under each priority, the RERC must be designed to contribute to the 
following outcomes:
    (1) Increased technical and scientific knowledge relevant to its 
designated priority research area. The RERC must contribute to this 
outcome by conducting high-quality, rigorous research and development 
projects.
    (2) Increased innovation in technologies, products, environments, 
performance guidelines, and monitoring and assessment tools applicable 
to its designated priority research area. The RERC must contribute to 
this outcome through the development and testing of these innovations.
    (3) Improved research capacity in its designated priority research 
area. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by collaborating with 
the relevant industry, professional associations, institutions of 
higher education, health care providers, or educators, as appropriate.
    (4) Improved usability and accessibility of products and 
environments in the RERC's designated priority research area. The RERC 
must contribute to this outcome by emphasizing the principles of 
universal design in its product research and development. For purposes 
of this section, the term ``universal design'' refers to the design of 
products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest 
extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design.
    (5) Improved awareness and understanding of cutting-edge 
developments in technologies within its designated priority research 
area. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by identifying and 
communicating with relevant stakeholders, including NIDRR, individuals 
with disabilities, their representatives, disability organizations, 
service providers, professional journals, manufacturers, and other 
interested parties regarding trends and evolving product concepts 
related to its designated priority research area.
    (6) Increased impact of research in the designated priority 
research area. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by providing 
technical assistance to relevant public and private organizations, 
individuals with disabilities, employers, and schools on policies, 
guidelines, and standards related to its designated priority research 
area.
    (7) Increased transfer of RERC-developed technologies to the 
marketplace. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by developing and 
implementing a plan for ensuring that all technologies developed by the 
RERC are made available to the public. The technology transfer plan 
must be developed in the first year of the project period in 
consultation with the NIDRR-funded Disability Rehabilitation Research 
Project, Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer.
    In addition, under each priority, the RERC must--
     Have the capability to design, build, and test prototype 
devices and assist in the technology transfer and knowledge translation 
of successful solutions to relevant production and service delivery 
settings;
     Evaluate the efficacy and safety of its new products, 
instrumentation, or assistive devices;
     Provide as part of its proposal, and then implement, a 
plan that describes how it will include, as appropriate, individuals 
with disabilities or their representatives in all phases of its 
activities, including research, development, training, dissemination, 
and evaluation;
     Provide as part of its proposal, and then implement, in 
consultation with the NIDRR-funded National Center for the 
Dissemination of Disability Research, a plan to disseminate its 
research results to individuals with disabilities, their 
representatives, disability organizations, service providers, 
professional journals, manufacturers, and other interested parties;
     Conduct a state-of-the-science conference on its 
designated priority research area in the fourth year of the project 
period, and publish a comprehensive report on the final outcomes of the 
conference in the fifth year of the project period; and
     Coordinate research projects of mutual interest with 
relevant NIDRR-funded projects, as identified through consultation with 
the NIDRR project officer.

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 priority a 
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
    Final Priorities: We will announce the final priorities in a notice 
in the Federal Register. We will determine the final priorities 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 these priorities, 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

[[Page 21551]]

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 extent practicable--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, 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. These proposed 
priorities will generate new knowledge through research and 
development. Another benefit of these proposed priorities is that the 
establishment of new RERCs will improve the lives of individuals with 
disabilities. The new RERCs will generate, disseminate, and promote the 
use of new information that will improve the options for individuals 
with disabilities to fully participate in their communities.
    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 compact disc) 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: 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) on the 
Internet at the following site: www.ed.gov/news/fedregister. To use PDF 
you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this 
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: April 5, 2012.
Alexa Posny,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2012-8614 Filed 4-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P