Final Priority; National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research; Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects Program, 23032-23034 [2015-09606]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
• Administration for Community Living

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 79 (Friday, April 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23032-23034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09606]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Community Living


Final Priority; National Institute on Disability, Independent 
Living, and Rehabilitation Research; Disability and Rehabilitation 
Research Projects Program

AGENCY: Administration for Community Living, Department of Health and 
Human Services.

ACTION: Final priority.

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

    CFDA Number: 84.133A-7.

SUMMARY: The Administrator of the Administration for Community Living 
announces a priority for the Disability and Rehabilitation Research 
Projects (DRRPs) Program administered by the National Institute on 
Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR). 
Specifically, we announce a priority for a DRRP on Promoting Universal 
Design in the Built Environment. The Administrator of the 
Administration for Community Living may use this priority for 
competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2015 and later years. We take this 
action to focus research attention on an area of national need. We 
intend for this priority to contribute to strengthened evidence-base 
for UD standards and strategies and improved access to the built 
environment for individuals with disabilities.

DATES: Effective Date: This priority is effective May 26, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marlene Spencer, U.S. Department of 
Health And Human Services, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5133, Potomac 
Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2700. Telephone: (202) 245-
7532 or by email: marlene.spencer@acl.hhs.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, and to 
improve the effectiveness of services authorized under the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation Act).

Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects

    The purpose of NIDILRR's DRRPs, 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 by developing methods, procedures, and 
rehabilitation technologies that advance a wide range of independent 
living and employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities, 
especially individuals with the most significant disabilities. DRRPs 
carry out one or more of the following types of activities, as 
specified and defined in 34 CFR 350.13 through 350.19: research, 
training, demonstration, development, utilization, dissemination, and 
technical assistance.
    An applicant for assistance under this program must demonstrate in 
its application how it will address, in whole or in part, the needs of 
individuals with disabilities from minority backgrounds (34 CFR 
350.40(a)). The approaches an applicant may take to meet this 
requirement are found in 34 CFR 350.40(b). Additional information on 
the DRRP program can be found at: www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/res-program.html#DRRP.

    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(a).

    Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.
    We published a notice of proposed priority (NPP) for this program 
in the Federal Register on February 25, 2015 (80 FR 10099). That notice 
contained background information and our reasons for proposing the 
particular priority.
    There are differences between the proposed priority and this final 
priority.
    Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the notice of 
proposed priority, six parties submitted comments on the proposed 
priority.
    Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes. In 
addition, we do not address general comments that raised concerns not 
directly related to the proposed priority.
    Analysis of the Comments and Changes: An analysis of the comments 
and of any changes in the priority since publication of the NPP 
follows.
    Comment: Two commenters noted that research on the costs of, as 
well as the benefits of and savings from universal design (UD) 
applications, can facilitate future adoption of UD principles. These 
commenters suggested that the priority be revised to require such 
research on the costs and benefits of UD.
    Discussion: Paragraph (a) requires research toward developing 
evidence-based practices for UD implementation. Research under this 
paragraph could include analysis of the costs, benefits, and savings 
associated with UD applications. Nothing in the priority precludes such 
research. NIDILRR does not wish to further specify the research 
requirements as suggested by the commenters and thereby limit the 
breadth of research topics proposed under this priority. However, we do 
agree that findings from analyses of the costs, benefits, and savings 
associated with UD implementation could help facilitate further 
adoption of UD principles into mainstream architecture and the 
development and construction of built environments.
    Changes: We have modified the priority to include analyses of the 
costs, savings, and benefits of UD implementation as an optional 
activity that applicants may propose. The peer

[[Page 23033]]

review process will determine the merits of each proposal.
    Comment: One commenter requested that NIDILRR refer to individuals 
with different abilities, instead of individuals with disabilities.
    Discussion: NIDILRR aims to sponsor research that is directly 
applicable to, and serves, the needs of individuals with disabilities. 
While we understand that UD applications are intended to be beneficial 
to people with a wide range of different abilities, NIDILRR's aim is to 
generate new knowledge, products, and environments that can be used to 
provide full opportunities and accommodations for its citizens with 
disabilities. NIDILRR's applicants and stakeholders are accustomed to 
our focus on improving the outcomes of individuals with disabilities 
through research and development, and we think that we should be 
consistent in our terminology. Therefore we will continue to directly 
refer to people with disabilities as our primary stakeholders.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One Commenter suggested that NIDILRR modify the priority 
to require the DRRP to engage in design and construction of practical 
and tangible physical projects that incorporate and demonstrate 
universal design concepts.
    Discussion: NIDILRR's intended outcome of this DRRP is further 
adoption of universal design principles into mainstream architecture 
and the development and construction of built environments. We will 
contribute to this outcome by sponsoring research, training, technical 
assistance, as well as the development of new UD curricula and new UD 
standards and guidelines. Through these activities we will contribute 
to much wider implementation of universally designed facilities, 
outdoor environments, and housing. We do not intend the DRRP's limited 
resources to be used for the design or construction of a small number 
of universally designed projects.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that NIDILRR revise the priority 
to specify that Universal Design incorporates the concept of ``healthy 
indoor environmental quality'' (IEQ) to make buildings healthier for 
everyone and more accessible for people with chemical or electrical 
sensitivities.
    Discussion: Nothing in the priority precludes applicants from 
including IEQ in its conceptualization of universal design, or in its 
work to facilitate the further adoption of universal design principles 
into the mainstream architecture and the development and construction 
of built environments. However, NIDILRR does not have a sufficient 
basis for further specifying the purposefully broad, long-standing 
principles of UD that the DRRP is intended to promote.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that NIDILRR modify the priority 
to include specific reference to the ``Goals of Universal Design,'' as 
published by Steinfeld and Maisel in 2012. This commenter suggested 
that these goals can be used by the DRRP to define and measure outcomes 
of UD practice and to frame the transfer of knowledge about UD into 
practice.
    Discussion: The intended outcome of this priority is to expand UD 
practice into the mainstream of design, architecture, and construction 
of built environments. Nothing in the priority precludes applicants 
from using the ``Goals of Universal Design'' to frame or guide their 
work toward this outcome. However, NIDILRR does not wish to further 
specify the conceptual or measurement framework that is to be used by 
the DRRP, because we do not want to limit the breadth of approaches 
that various applicants may propose to meet this critical need. The 
peer review process will determine the merits of each proposal.
    Changes: None.

Final Priority

    The Administrator of the Administration for Community Living 
establishes a priority for a DRRP on Promoting Universal Design in the 
Built Environment.
    The intended outcome of the DRRP on Universal Design is further 
adoption of universal design principles into mainstream architecture 
and the development and construction of built environments. The DRRP 
must contribute to this outcome by:
    (a) Conducting research activities toward developing evidence-based 
practices for UD implementation in commercial and private facilities, 
outdoor environments, and housing. This research may include analyses 
of the costs, benefits, and savings associated with universal design 
implementation.
    (b) Creating measurable UD standards and guidelines to facilitate 
the implementation of UD principles in commercial and private 
facilities, outdoor environments, and housing.
    (c) Developing and promoting curricula on UD for university-level 
architecture, engineering, and design students.
    (d) Providing training and technical assistance to designers, 
architects, and builders to incorporate UD principles and features into 
their buildings, projects, and communities.
    (e) Providing training and technical assistance to NIDILRR's 
engineering and assistive technology grantees to incorporate UD 
strategies and standards into development projects serving the needs of 
individuals with disabilities and the broader population.
    (f) Partnering with relevant stakeholders in carrying out all DRRP 
activities. Stakeholders include but are not limited to: individuals 
with disabilities, professional organizations that teach design 
principles, researchers, engineers, planners, designers, developers, 
architects, and builders.

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 (45 CFR 75).
    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 (45 CFR 75); or (2) selecting an 
application that meets the priority over an application of comparable 
merit that does not meet the priority (45 CFR 75).
    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 (45 CFR 75).
    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

[[Page 23034]]

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
    (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 Administration for 
Community Living (ACL), Department of Health and Human Services 
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, ACL 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 ACL'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, and the proposed priority will generate new 
knowledge through research. The new DRRP will generate, disseminate, 
and promote the use of new information that would improve outcomes for 
individuals with disabilities in the areas of community living and 
participation, employment, and health and function.
    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 ACL 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: April 21, 2015.
John Tschida,
Director, National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and 
Rehabilitation Research.
[FR Doc. 2015-09606 Filed 4-23-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4154-01-P