Final Priority; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research-Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers, 32487-32490 [2014-13095]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 108 / Thursday, June 5, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
(2) Polish Fest fireworks display on
June 14, 2014, from 10:15 p.m. until
11:15 p.m.;
(3) Summerfest fireworks display on
June 25, 2014, and July 2, 2014 from
9:15 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.;
(4) Festa Italiana fireworks display on
each day of July 18, 19, and 20, 2014,
from 10:15 p.m. until 11:15 p.m.;
(5) Arab World Festival fireworks
display on August 9, 2014, from 9:15
p.m. until 10:15 p.m.;
(6) German Fest fireworks display on
July 25, 2014, from 10:15 p.m. until
11:15 p.m.;
(7) Irish Fest fireworks display on
August 17, 2014, from 10:15 p.m. until
11:15 p.m.;
(8) Indian Summer fireworks display
on September 6, 2014, from 9:45 p.m.
until 10:45 p.m.
This safety zone will encompass the
waters of Lake Michigan within
Milwaukee Harbor including the Harbor
Island Lagoon enclosed by a line
connecting the following points:
beginning at 43°02′00″ N, 087°53′53″ W;
then south to 43°01′44″ N, 087°53′53″
W; then east to 43°01′44″ N, 087°53′25″
W; then north to 43°02′00″ N,
087°53′25″ W; then west to the point of
origin. All vessels must obtain
permission from the Captain of the Port,
Lake Michigan, or his or her on-scene
representative to enter, move within, or
exit the safety zone. Vessels and persons
granted permission to enter the safety
zone must obey all lawful orders or
directions of the Captain of the Port,
Lake Michigan, or his or her on-scene
representative. This document is issued
under authority of 33 CFR 165.935
Safety Zone, Milwaukee Harbor,
Milwaukee, WI and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In
addition to this document in the
Federal Register, the Coast Guard will
provide the maritime community with
advance notification of the enforcement
period via broadcast Notice to Mariners
or Local Notice to Mariners. The
Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, or
his or her on-scene representative may
be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
Dated: May 21, 2014.
M.W. Sibley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 2014–13147 Filed 6–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Jun 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2014–0338]
Safety Zone; Independence Day
Fireworks, Kings Beach, CA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of enforcement of
regulation.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard will enforce
the safety zone for the Independence
Day Fireworks, Kings Beach, CA in the
Captain of the Port, San Francisco area
of responsibility on July 3, 2014. This
action is necessary to protect life and
property of the maritime public from the
hazards associated with the fireworks
display. During the enforcement period,
unauthorized persons or vessels are
prohibited from entering into, transiting
through, or anchoring in the safety zone,
unless authorized by the Patrol
Commander (PATCOM).
DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR
165.1191, Table 1, number 17, will be
enforced from 7 a.m. through 10 p.m. on
July 3, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this notice, call
or email Lieutenant Junior Grade
William Hawn, Sector San Francisco
Waterways Safety Division, U.S. Coast
Guard; telephone 415–399–7442, email
D11-PF-MarineEvents@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast
Guard will enforce a safety zone in
navigable waters around and under the
fireworks barge within a radius of 100
feet during the loading, transit, and
arrival of the fireworks barge to the
display location and until the start of
the fireworks display. From 7 a.m. until
9 a.m. on July 3, 2014, the fireworks
barge will be loading pyrotechnics off of
Tahoe Keys Marina in South Lake
Tahoe, CA in approximate position
38°56′05″ N, 120°00′09″ W (NAD 83).
From 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. on July 3, 2014,
the loaded fireworks barge will transit
from Tahoe Keys Marina to the launch
site off of Kings Beach, CA in
approximate position 39°13′55″ N,
120°01′42″ W (NAD 83) where it will
remain until the commencement of the
fireworks display. Upon the
commencement of the 30 minute
fireworks display, scheduled to begin at
9:30 p.m. on July 3, 2014, the safety
zone will increase in size to encompass
the navigable waters around and under
the fireworks barge within a radius
1,000 feet in approximate position
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32487
39°13′55″ N, 120°01′42″ W (NAD 83) for
the Independence Day Fireworks, Kings
beach, CA in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1,
Item number 17. This safety zone will
be in effect from 7 a.m. until 10 p.m. on
July 3, 2014.
Under the provisions of 33 CFR
165.1191, unauthorized persons or
vessels are prohibited from entering
into, transiting through, or anchoring in
the safety zone during all applicable
effective dates and times, unless
authorized to do so by the PATCOM.
Additionally, each person who receives
notice of a lawful order or direction
issued by an official patrol vessel shall
obey the order or direction. The
PATCOM is empowered to forbid entry
into and control the regulated area. The
PATCOM shall be designated by the
Commander, Coast Guard Sector San
Francisco. The PATCOM may, upon
request, allow the transit of commercial
vessels through regulated areas when it
is safe to do so.
This notice is issued under authority
of 33 CFR 165.1191 and 5 U.S.C. 552 (a).
In addition to this notice in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard will provide
the maritime community with extensive
advance notification of the safety zone
and its enforcement period via the Local
Notice to Mariners. If the Captain of the
Port determines that the regulated area
need not be enforced for the full
duration stated in this notice, a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be
used to grant general permission to
enter the regulated area.
Dated: May 22, 2014.
Gregory G. Stump,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2014–13142 Filed 6–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter III
[ED–2014–OSERS–0025]
Final Priority; National Institute on
Disability and Rehabilitation
Research—Rehabilitation Engineering
Research Centers
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Final priority.
AGENCY:
[CFDA Number: 84.133E–5.]
The Assistant Secretary for
Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services announces a priority for the
Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Projects and Centers Program
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
32488
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 108 / Thursday, June 5, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
administered by the National Institute
on Disability and Rehabilitation
Research (NIDRR). Specifically, we
announce a priority for a Rehabilitation
Engineering Research Center (RERC) on
Technologies to Enhance Independence
in Daily Living for Adults with
Cognitive Impairments. The Assistant
Secretary may use this priority for
competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014
and later years. We take this action to
focus research attention on an area of
national need. We intend the priority to
contribute to improved outcomes
related to independence in daily
activities in the home, community, or
workplace setting for adults with
cognitive impairments.
DATES: Effective Date: This priority is
effective July 7, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patricia Barrett, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Room 5142, Potomac Center Plaza
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202–2700.
Telephone: (202) 245–6211 or by email:
patricia.barrett@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:
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. The
program is also intended to improve the
effectiveness of services authorized
under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (Rehabilitation Act).
Rehabilitation Engineering Research
Centers
The purpose of the RERCs, which are
funded through the Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Projects and
Centers Program, is to achieve the goals
of, and improve the effectiveness of,
services authorized under the
Rehabilitation Act through welldesigned research, training, technical
assistance, and dissemination activities
in important topical areas as specified
by NIDRR with guidance from its
Rehabilitation Research Advisory
Council. These activities are designed to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Jun 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
benefit rehabilitation service providers,
individuals with disabilities, family
members, policymakers, and other
research stakeholders. Additional
information on the RERC program can
be found at: https://www2.ed.gov/
programs/rerc/#types.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and
764(b)(3).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34
CFR part 350.
We published a notice of proposed
priority for this program in the Federal
Register on April 2, 2014 (79 FR 18490).
That notice contained background
information and our reasons for
proposing the particular priority.
There are no differences between the
proposed priority and this final priority.
Public Comment: In response to our
invitation in the notice of proposed
priority we did not receive any
comments on the proposed priority.
Final Priority
The Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services
establishes a priority for a RERC on
Technologies to Enhance Independence
in Daily Living for Adults with
Cognitive Impairments.
The RERC must focus on innovative
technological solutions, new
knowledge, and implementation
strategies that enhance the
independence and self-management of
adults with cognitive impairment.
Under this priority, the RERC must
research, develop, and evaluate new
technologies, or adapt and evaluate
existing technologies, to enhance the
ability of adults with cognitive
impairment to perform daily activities
of their choice in the home, community,
or workplace. Technologies developed
or adapted must be designed for
commercialization as consumer
products or for integration into
rehabilitation practice or relevant
service delivery systems. Research and
development topics under this priority
may include, but are not limited to:
Monitoring and prompting technologies
or other information or communication
aids; assistive technologies, including
socially assistive robotics; mobile and
wearable technologies; virtual reality;
and care coordination or tele-health,
tele-rehabilitation, and other telesupport systems to facilitate improved
activities of daily living.
In responding to this priority,
applicants must specify the target
populations or subgroups of adults with
cognitive impairments that they intend
to focus on and identify the setting or
settings for which they intend to
develop technologies: Home,
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
community, or workplace. Applicants
must also limit the number of research
and development projects to a
maximum of eight, and restrict the range
of different types of technologies to
what is manageable with available
resources.
Under this priority, the RERC must be
designed to contribute to the following
outcomes:
(a) Increased technical and scientific
knowledge relevant to technologies for
increasing independence in daily living
for adults with cognitive impairments.
The RERC must contribute to this
outcome by establishing a rigorous
research and development plan that is
balanced between technology
development or adaption and
technology evaluation and incorporates
needs assessment, usability testing, and
intervention development or efficacy
studies, as appropriate. The research
and development plan must be designed
to build a base of evidence for assessing
the usability, accessibility, acceptance,
utility, and cost-benefit of technologies
intended to improve independence in
daily activities for adults with cognitive
impairment in the home, community, or
workplace settings. The RERC must
contribute to this outcome by:
(i) Building a transdisciplinary team
of collaborators from relevant
disciplines, such as: Rehabilitation and
bio-engineering, computer science,
human factors specialists, cognitive and
behavioral scientists, clinicians, and
other relevant providers;
(ii) Conducting research and research
syntheses or secondary analysis of
existing data to evaluate user needs and
specify the accessibility, acceptance,
and human factors design features that
will need to be built into the technology
solutions developed and evaluated by
the RERC to accommodate the cognitive
impairments and preferences of the
target population;
(iii) Conducting rigorous usability
testing in the settings in which the
technology will be used;
(iv) Developing and prioritizing a list
of evaluation topics that, when
addressed, will lead to research-based
information on the utility or efficacy of
technology solutions developed by the
RERC; and
(v) Involving key stakeholders in the
research and research planning
activities to maximize the relevance and
usefulness of the research products
being developed. Stakeholders can
include, but are not limited to,
individuals with disabilities and their
families; national, State, or local-level
policymakers, administrators, or service
providers; and industry representatives.
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 108 / Thursday, June 5, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
(b) Improved usability and
effectiveness of technologies, products,
devices, systems, performance
guidelines, and assessment tools
through systematic development or
adaptation, testing, and evaluation of
innovations. In developing the
technologies under this priority the
RERC must:
(i) Incorporate user-centered design
strategies and consider the context in
which the technology product, device,
or system will be used;
(ii) Emphasize the principles of
universal design and, as appropriate,
conform to human factors standards,
such as reliability, safety, and
simplicity; accessibility and
acceptability to users; protective of
users’ privacy preferences; intuitive user
interfaces; feedback in meaningful
sensory modalities; and appropriateness
to diverse populations;
(iii) Incorporate ongoing training
opportunities or user supports into the
design of the technology or into the
practice settings or delivery systems in
which the technology will be integrated;
and
(iv) Ensure that the technologies are
interoperable within existing
rehabilitation systems or home or
mobile technologies and that they
communicate with existing information
technology systems, as appropriate.
(c) Improved research capacity areas
that will contribute to enhancing the
ability of adults with cognitive
impairment to perform daily activities.
The RERC must contribute to this
outcome by collaborating with the
relevant institutions of higher
education, professional associations,
clinicians and service providers, and
other researchers or educators, as
appropriate.
(d) Improved awareness and
understanding of cutting-edge
developments and promising
technology solutions that will
contribute to enhancing the ability of
adults with cognitive impairment to
perform daily activities. The RERC must
contribute to this outcome by
identifying and communicating with
relevant stakeholders, including NIDRR,
individuals with disabilities and 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.
(e) Increased impact of research and
development activities carried out
under this priority area. The RERC must
contribute to this outcome by:
(i) Providing technical assistance to
relevant public and private
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Jun 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
organizations, individuals with
disabilities and their families, long-term
services and supports providers, and
employers on policies, guidelines, and
standards; and
(ii) Establishing or contributing to an
existing program or service that
provides objective information and
technical and consumer reviews about
technologies of promise to support
independence in daily living for adults
with cognitive impairments.
(f) Increased transfer of RERCdeveloped technologies to the
marketplace for widespread testing and
use by developing and implementing a
plan to ensure that technologies
developed by the RERC are made
available to the public or to service
delivery systems that serve the public.
This technology transfer plan must be
developed in the first year of the project
period in consultation with the NIDRRfunded Center on Knowledge
Translation for Technology Transfer.
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)).
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32489
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 final 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 final
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
upon 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
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
32490
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 108 / Thursday, June 5, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
(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 issuing this final priority 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 regulatory
action is consistent with the principles
in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this
regulatory action does 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, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this
regulatory action. The potential costs
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 Program have been well
established over the years, as projects
similar to the one envisioned by the
final priority have been completed
successfully. The new RERC would
generate, disseminate, and promote the
use of new information that is intended
to improve outcomes for individuals
with disabilities in the areas of
community living and participation,
employment, and health and function.
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or compact disc) on
request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Jun 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
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: June 2, 2014.
Michael K. Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2014–13095 Filed 6–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
enforcement date of this change was
based on the review of subsequent
mailer feedback. All other requirements
that were published in the Federal
Register (78 FR 76548–76560) will be
implemented as specified.
Despite the decision to defer the
above referenced enforcement date, the
Postal Service continues to believe that
mailers who currently distribute BRM
cartons and labels for the return of
parcel-shaped items would be better
served by switching to Merchandise
Return Service® In light of mailers’
continuing eligibility to use BRM for the
payment of postage for parcel-shaped
items, and the Postal Service’s goal of
promoting enhanced package visibility,
the Postal Service expects to propose
rules mandating the use of an Intelligent
Mail® package barcode on certain BRM
cartons and labels.
Stanley F. Mires,
Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice.
[FR Doc. 2014–13042 Filed 6–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 111
Elimination of Business Reply Mail
(BRM) Parcels; Deferral of
Enforcement Date
Postal ServiceTM.
ACTION: Final rule; partial deferral of the
enforcement date.
AGENCY:
The Postal Service gives
notice that it is deferring the previouslyannounced enforcement date of January
25, 2015, for eliminating mailers’ option
to use Business Reply Mail® to pay
postage for parcel-shaped items.
DATES: The enforcement date for the
relevant portions of the final rule
published December 18, 2013 (78 FR
76548), is delayed indefinitely.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Suzanne Newman, 603–673–2002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Postal
Service hereby gives notice that the
enforcement date of January 25, 2015,
for eliminating mailers’ option to use
Business Reply Mail (BRM) to pay
postage for parcel-shaped items,
previously published on December 18,
2013, in a final rule in the Federal
Register (78 FR 76548–76560), is hereby
deferred until further notice. In
particular, this deferral applies to the
requirements specified in the
amendment to Mailing Standards of the
United States Postal Service, Domestic
Mail Manual (DMM®) 505.1.4.1
(Business Reply Mail—General
Information—Description) published at
78 FR 76560. The decision to defer the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2003–0009; FRL–9911–
82–Region 10]
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion
of the Harbor Oil Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 10 announces the
deletion of the Harbor Oil Superfund
Site (Site) located at 11535 North Force
Avenue in Portland, Oregon, from the
National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL,
promulgated pursuant to section 105 of
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is
an appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and
the State of Oregon, through the
Department of Environmental Quality
have determined that all appropriate
response actions under CERCLA have
been completed. However, this deletion
does not preclude future actions under
Superfund.
DATES: Effective Date: This action is
effective June 5, 2014.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 108 (Thursday, June 5, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32487-32490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13095]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter III
[ED-2014-OSERS-0025]
Final Priority; National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research--Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Final priority.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[CFDA Number: 84.133E-5.]
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services announces a priority for the Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program
[[Page 32488]]
administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation
Research (NIDRR). Specifically, we announce a priority for a
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Technologies to
Enhance Independence in Daily Living for Adults with Cognitive
Impairments. The Assistant Secretary may use this priority for
competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014 and later years. We take this
action to focus research attention on an area of national need. We
intend the priority to contribute to improved outcomes related to
independence in daily activities in the home, community, or workplace
setting for adults with cognitive impairments.
DATES: Effective Date: This priority is effective July 7, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Barrett, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5142, Potomac Center Plaza
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2700. Telephone: (202) 245-6211 or by
email: patricia.barrett@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:
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. The program is also intended to improve the effectiveness
of services authorized under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended
(Rehabilitation Act).
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers
The purpose of the RERCs, which are funded through the Disability
and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program, is to achieve
the goals of, and improve the effectiveness of, services authorized
under the Rehabilitation Act through well-designed research, training,
technical assistance, and dissemination activities in important topical
areas as specified by NIDRR with guidance from its Rehabilitation
Research Advisory Council. These activities are designed to benefit
rehabilitation service providers, individuals with disabilities, family
members, policymakers, and other research stakeholders. Additional
information on the RERC program can be found at: https://www2.ed.gov/programs/rerc/#types.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(3).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.
We published a notice of proposed priority for this program in the
Federal Register on April 2, 2014 (79 FR 18490). That notice contained
background information and our reasons for proposing the particular
priority.
There are no differences between the proposed priority and this
final priority.
Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the notice of
proposed priority we did not receive any comments on the proposed
priority.
Final Priority
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services establishes a priority for a RERC on Technologies to Enhance
Independence in Daily Living for Adults with Cognitive Impairments.
The RERC must focus on innovative technological solutions, new
knowledge, and implementation strategies that enhance the independence
and self-management of adults with cognitive impairment.
Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate
new technologies, or adapt and evaluate existing technologies, to
enhance the ability of adults with cognitive impairment to perform
daily activities of their choice in the home, community, or workplace.
Technologies developed or adapted must be designed for
commercialization as consumer products or for integration into
rehabilitation practice or relevant service delivery systems. Research
and development topics under this priority may include, but are not
limited to: Monitoring and prompting technologies or other information
or communication aids; assistive technologies, including socially
assistive robotics; mobile and wearable technologies; virtual reality;
and care coordination or tele-health, tele-rehabilitation, and other
tele-support systems to facilitate improved activities of daily living.
In responding to this priority, applicants must specify the target
populations or subgroups of adults with cognitive impairments that they
intend to focus on and identify the setting or settings for which they
intend to develop technologies: Home, community, or workplace.
Applicants must also limit the number of research and development
projects to a maximum of eight, and restrict the range of different
types of technologies to what is manageable with available resources.
Under this priority, the RERC must be designed to contribute to the
following outcomes:
(a) Increased technical and scientific knowledge relevant to
technologies for increasing independence in daily living for adults
with cognitive impairments. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by
establishing a rigorous research and development plan that is balanced
between technology development or adaption and technology evaluation
and incorporates needs assessment, usability testing, and intervention
development or efficacy studies, as appropriate. The research and
development plan must be designed to build a base of evidence for
assessing the usability, accessibility, acceptance, utility, and cost-
benefit of technologies intended to improve independence in daily
activities for adults with cognitive impairment in the home, community,
or workplace settings. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by:
(i) Building a transdisciplinary team of collaborators from
relevant disciplines, such as: Rehabilitation and bio-engineering,
computer science, human factors specialists, cognitive and behavioral
scientists, clinicians, and other relevant providers;
(ii) Conducting research and research syntheses or secondary
analysis of existing data to evaluate user needs and specify the
accessibility, acceptance, and human factors design features that will
need to be built into the technology solutions developed and evaluated
by the RERC to accommodate the cognitive impairments and preferences of
the target population;
(iii) Conducting rigorous usability testing in the settings in
which the technology will be used;
(iv) Developing and prioritizing a list of evaluation topics that,
when addressed, will lead to research-based information on the utility
or efficacy of technology solutions developed by the RERC; and
(v) Involving key stakeholders in the research and research
planning activities to maximize the relevance and usefulness of the
research products being developed. Stakeholders can include, but are
not limited to, individuals with disabilities and their families;
national, State, or local-level policymakers, administrators, or
service providers; and industry representatives.
[[Page 32489]]
(b) Improved usability and effectiveness of technologies, products,
devices, systems, performance guidelines, and assessment tools through
systematic development or adaptation, testing, and evaluation of
innovations. In developing the technologies under this priority the
RERC must:
(i) Incorporate user-centered design strategies and consider the
context in which the technology product, device, or system will be
used;
(ii) Emphasize the principles of universal design and, as
appropriate, conform to human factors standards, such as reliability,
safety, and simplicity; accessibility and acceptability to users;
protective of users' privacy preferences; intuitive user interfaces;
feedback in meaningful sensory modalities; and appropriateness to
diverse populations;
(iii) Incorporate ongoing training opportunities or user supports
into the design of the technology or into the practice settings or
delivery systems in which the technology will be integrated; and
(iv) Ensure that the technologies are interoperable within existing
rehabilitation systems or home or mobile technologies and that they
communicate with existing information technology systems, as
appropriate.
(c) Improved research capacity areas that will contribute to
enhancing the ability of adults with cognitive impairment to perform
daily activities. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by
collaborating with the relevant institutions of higher education,
professional associations, clinicians and service providers, and other
researchers or educators, as appropriate.
(d) Improved awareness and understanding of cutting-edge
developments and promising technology solutions that will contribute to
enhancing the ability of adults with cognitive impairment to perform
daily activities. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by
identifying and communicating with relevant stakeholders, including
NIDRR, individuals with disabilities and 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.
(e) Increased impact of research and development activities carried
out under this priority area. The RERC must contribute to this outcome
by:
(i) Providing technical assistance to relevant public and private
organizations, individuals with disabilities and their families, long-
term services and supports providers, and employers on policies,
guidelines, and standards; and
(ii) Establishing or contributing to an existing program or service
that provides objective information and technical and consumer reviews
about technologies of promise to support independence in daily living
for adults with cognitive impairments.
(f) Increased transfer of RERC-developed technologies to the
marketplace for widespread testing and use by developing and
implementing a plan to ensure that technologies developed by the RERC
are made available to the public or to service delivery systems that
serve the public. This technology transfer plan must be developed in
the first year of the project period in consultation with the NIDRR-
funded Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer.
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)).
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 final 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 final 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 upon 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
[[Page 32490]]
(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 issuing this final priority 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 regulatory action is consistent with the principles in
Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this regulatory action does 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, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs 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 Program have been well established over the years, as
projects similar to the one envisioned by the final priority have been
completed successfully. The new RERC would generate, disseminate, and
promote the use of new information that is intended to improve outcomes
for individuals with disabilities in the areas of community living and
participation, employment, and health and function.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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: June 2, 2014.
Michael K. Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2014-13095 Filed 6-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P