Proposed Priority-Training of Interpreters for Individuals Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing and Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind program, 20268-20274 [2016-07933]
Download as PDF
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
20268
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Advisory Committee, nominators
should submit the following
information:
(1) Name, title, and relevant contact
information (including phone and email
address) and a description of the issues
addressed in this rulemaking that such
individual is qualified to address, and
the interests such a person shall
represent;
(2) A letter of support from a
company, union, trade association, or
non-profit organization on letterhead
containing a brief description why the
nominee is qualified and should be
considered for membership to the extent
the nominee proposes to represent
parties with interest in this proceeding;
(3) A written commitment that the
applicant or nominee shall actively
participate in good faith in the
development of the rule under
consideration;
(4) Short biography of nominee
including professional and academic
credentials;
(5) An affirmative statement that the
nominee meets all Committee eligibility
requirements; and
(6) If applicable, the reason(s) that the
parties identified in this notice of intent
as affected interests and stakeholders do
not adequately represent the interest of
the person submitting the application or
nomination.
All individuals representing a
stakeholder interest who wish to serve
on the Reg-Neg Committee should apply
for membership by supplying the
information listed above. Please do not
send company, trade association, or
organization brochures or any other
information. Materials submitted should
total two single-spaced pages or less.
Should more information be needed,
DOT staff will contact the nominee,
obtain information from the nominee’s
past affiliations, or obtain information
from publicly available sources, such as
the Internet. Nominations may be
emailed to accesscommittee@dot.gov.
Nominations must be received by April
21, 2016.
Nominees selected for appointment to
the Committee will be notified of
appointment by email. Nominations are
open to all individuals without regard to
race, color, religion, sex, national origin,
age, mental or physical handicap,
marital status, or sexual orientation. To
ensure that recommendations to the
Secretary take into account the needs of
the diverse groups served by DOT,
membership shall include, to the extent
practicable, individuals with
demonstrated ability to represent
persons with disabilities, minorities,
and women. The Department will file
any comments it receives on this notice
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:16 Apr 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
of intent in docket DOT–OST–2015–
0246. Notice to the public will be
published in the Federal Register at
least 15 days prior to each plenary
meeting of the ACCESS Advisory
Committee and members of the public
will be invited to attend.
Issued under the authority of
delegation in 49 CFR 1.27.
Dated: April 4, 2016.
Kathryn B. Thomson,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2016–08062 Filed 4–6–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter III
[Docket ID ED–2016–OSERS–0005; CFDA
Number: 84.160C.]
Proposed Priority—Training of
Interpreters for Individuals Who Are
Deaf or Hard of Hearing and
Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind
program
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Proposed priority.
AGENCY:
The Assistant Secretary for
Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services announces a priority under the
Training of Interpreters for Individuals
Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing and
Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind
program. The Assistant Secretary may
use this priority for competitions in
fiscal year 2016 and later years. We take
this action to provide training and
technical assistance to better prepare
novice interpreters to become highly
qualified nationally certified sign
language interpreters.
DATES: We must receive your comments
on or before May 9, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery,
or hand delivery. We will not accept
comments submitted by fax or by email
or those submitted after the comment
period. To ensure that we do not receive
duplicate copies, please submit your
comments only once. In addition, please
include the Docket ID at the top of your
comments.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov to submit your
comments electronically. Information
on using Regulations.gov, including
instructions for accessing agency
documents, submitting comments, and
viewing the docket, is available on the
site under the ‘‘help’’ tab.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery,
or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver
your comments about these proposed
regulations, address them to Kristen
Rhinehart-Fernandez, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue
SW., Room 5062, Potomac Center Plaza
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202–5076.
Privacy Note: The Department’s policy is
to make all comments received from
members of the public available for public
viewing in their entirety on the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov.
Therefore, commenters should be careful to
include in their comments only information
that they wish to make publicly available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kristen Rhinehart-Fernandez.
Telephone: (202) 245–6103 or by email:
Kristen.Rhinehart@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:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you
to submit comments regarding this
notice. To ensure that your comments
have maximum effect in developing the
notice of final priority, we urge you to
identify clearly the specific section of
the proposed priority that each
comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in
complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866
and 13563 and their overall requirement
of reducing regulatory burden that
might result from this proposed priority.
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.
Specific Issues Open for Comment:
In addition to your general comments
and recommended clarifications, we
seek input on the proposed design of the
Experiential Learning Model
Demonstration Center for Novice
Interpreters and Baccalaureate Degree
ASL-English Interpretation Programs
(Center) and expectations for
implementation. We are particularly
interested in your feedback on the
following questions:
• Are the proposed required project
activities appropriate? Are there any
additional project activities beyond
those included in the proposed priority
that should be considered? For example,
are there any specific activities that may
be strongly associated with long-term
success for ASL-English interpreters
that we have not included? If so, please
specify what additional activities
should be required and why.
E:\FR\FM\07APP1.SGM
07APP1
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
• Under the Training Activities
section of the proposed priority, we
proposed a team of individuals to work
with novice interpreters. Are the
proposed roles for interpreter advisors
and trained mentors clear and
appropriate? Should the roles and
responsibilities of the interpreter
advisor and mentor be changed or
combined? In your experience, how
might qualified interpreters work with
novice interpreters differently than
trained mentors? Should these roles be
more or less prescriptive than what we
have outlined in the proposed priority?
• In the proposed priority, the Center
is expected to plan and design the
curriculum, develop training modules,
and implement a pilot experiential
learning program within the first two
years of the grant period. Is this timeline
reasonable? If not, what timeline should
be required for these expected project
deliverables?
• In addition to national certification,
such as, for example, the Registry of
Interpreters for the Deaf (RID) National
Interpreter Certification (NIC) tests,
what measures for assessing the
improvement in a novice interpreter’s
skills should be required?
• How many cohorts should be
required to complete the experiential
learning program within the five-year
project period? Should the Department
require a certain number of novice
interpreters per cohort, and, if so, how
many?
• Beyond requiring a logic model and
a project evaluation, are there any
unique or additional strategies to ensure
that the program evaluation framework
is infused throughout the planning,
designing, and implementation of the
experiential learning curriculum that
the Department should include? If so,
please specify.
During and after the comment period,
you may inspect all public comments
about this proposed priority by
accessing Regulations.gov. You may also
inspect the comments in room 5062, 550
12th Street SW., PCP, Washington, DC
20202–5076, between the hours of 8:30
a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Washington, DC
time, Monday through Friday of each
week except Federal holidays. Please
contact the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:16 Apr 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
accommodation or auxiliary aid, please
contact the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: Under the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973
(Rehabilitation Act), as amended by the
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity
Act (WIOA), the Rehabilitation Services
Administration (RSA) makes grants to
public and private nonprofit agencies
and organizations, including
institutions of higher education, to
establish interpreter training programs
or to provide financial assistance for
ongoing interpreter training programs to
train a sufficient number of qualified
interpreters throughout the country. The
grants are designed to train interpreters
to effectively interpret and transliterate
using spoken, visual, and tactile modes
of communication; ensure the
maintenance of the interpreting skills of
qualified interpreters; and provide
opportunities for interpreters to improve
their skills in order to meet both the
highest standards approved by
certifying associations and the
communication needs of individuals
who are deaf or hard of hearing and
individuals who are deaf-blind.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 772(a)
and (f).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34
CFR part 396.
Proposed Priority:
This notice contains one proposed
priority.
Experiential Learning Model
Demonstration Center for Novice
Interpreters and Baccalaureate Degree
ASL-English Interpretation Programs.
Background:
Over the last 20 years, the fields of
interpreting and interpreter training
have changed significantly in response
to the evolving needs of deaf 1 children
and adults in the United States, which
include deaf consumers of the
Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) system.
The need for interpreting services
continues to exceed the available supply
of qualified interpreters.
Interpreters must be qualified to work
with both individuals with a range of
linguistic competencies from a variety
of cultural backgrounds and individuals
with disabilities. For example, the first
language of many deaf individuals is
either spoken English or a foreign
spoken language, and their second
language is ASL. This is, in part, a result
of advances in medical treatments, such
as an increase in the early detection and
1 As used in this notice, the word ‘‘deaf’’ refers
to (1) ‘deaf’ and ‘Deaf’ people, i.e. to the condition
of deafness; (2) to ‘deaf, hard of hearing, and DeafBlind’; and (3) to individuals who are culturally
Deaf and who use American Sign Language (ASL).
‘‘Deaf’’ refers only to the third group.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20269
intervention of hearing loss in newborns
and an increase in the use of cochlear
implants. In addition, deaf individuals
who have co-occurring disabilities
(including co-occurring disabilities that
affect speech and language skills, upper
extremity motor coordination, and
cognition) likely require specialized
supports to experience linguistic and
communication access to the general
environment. Further still, there are an
increasing number of deaf individuals
from minority and immigrant
communities who have unique
characteristics related to culture,
language, family structure, income and
socioeconomic background, and refugee
experience, as well as complex and
diverse communication needs (Cogen
and Cokely). These shifts in how deaf
individuals acquire and use language
make the task of interpreting more
difficult.
In addition, expanding requirements
in video relay interpreting and video
remote interpreting, the establishment
of new ‘‘national’’ standards and
credentials for interpreters to work in
specific settings (e.g., interpreting in
mental health and legal settings), and
the development of State-specific
licensure, certification, registration, or
other requirements (e.g., background
and criminal checks to work in certain
facilities) all have put a strain on the
availability of qualified interpreters.
Finally, interpreters need additional
education, training, and experience in
order to meet certification standards.
For example, in July 2012, a
precondition was added for candidates
sitting for RID National Interpreter
Certification Test requiring them to
have, at a minimum, a baccalaureate
degree in any field or major, or a
demonstrated educational equivalency,
before being permitted to take the
examination.
In 2014, RID awarded 280 new
credentials, and of those, 186
represented the NIC. RID reported an 87
percent pass rate for the knowledge
exam but only a 26 percent pass rate for
the performance exam. This problem is
exacerbated by the length of time
between graduating from an ASLEnglish Interpretation program and
achieving national certification. On
average, the length of time is 19–24
months (Cogen and Cokely, 2015). This
could be longer if a candidate does not
initially pass the NIC exam, due to a
mandatory six-month waiting period
before a candidate is eligible to retest.
Many graduates find work within six
months to one year of graduation, but in
most cases, these interpreting
assignments are too complex and are
therefore inappropriate for their skill
E:\FR\FM\07APP1.SGM
07APP1
20270
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
levels. These situations provide little or
no opportunities for support and
professional growth. Additional
education, training, and experience are
needed for novice interpreters to bridge
this graduation-to-credential gap and to
gain sufficient skills to interpret
effectively.
In sum, the pool of qualified
interpreters is insufficient to meet the
needs of deaf consumers in the United
States. To address this problem, the
Assistant Secretary proposes a priority
to establish a model demonstration
center to better prepare novice
interpreters to become nationally
certified sign language interpreters.
Interpreters must also be able to
understand and communicate
proficiently using technical vocabulary
and highly specialized discourse in a
variety of complex subject matters in
both English and ASL. Training, even
for experienced interpreters, in
specialized settings is needed, and for
this reason, we are publishing a notice
of proposed priority focusing on
interpreter training in specialized areas
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register.
References:
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Cogen, Cathy, M.Ed., and Cokely, Dennis,
Ph.D., ‘‘Preparing Interpreters for
Tomorrow: Report on a Study of
Emerging Trends in Interpreting and
Implications for Interpreter Education’’
(National Interpreter Education Center at
Northeastern University, January 2015).
Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf
‘‘Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Report’’
available at www.rid.org/2014-annualreport/#certification
Proposed Priority:
The purpose of this priority is to fund
a cooperative agreement for the
establishment of a model demonstration
center (Center) to: (1) Develop an
experiential learning program that could
be implemented through baccalaureate
degree ASL-English programs or
through partner organizations, such as
community-based organizations,
advocacy organizations, or commissions
for the Deaf or deaf-blind that work with
baccalaureate degree ASL-English
programs to provide work experiences
and mentoring; (2) pilot the experiential
learning program in three baccalaureate
degree ASL-English programs or partner
organizations and evaluate the results;
and (3) disseminate practices that are
promising or supported by evidence,
examples, and lessons learned.
The Center must be designed to
achieve, at a minimum, the following
outcomes:
(a) Increase the number of certified
interpreters.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:16 Apr 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
(b) Reduce the average length of time
it takes for novice interpreters to
become nationally certified after
graduating from baccalaureate degree
ASL-English interpretation programs;
and
(c) Increase the average number of
hours that novice interpreters, through
the experiential learning program,
interact with and learn from the local
deaf community.
Project Activities
To meet the requirements of this
priority, the Center must, at a minimum,
conduct the following activities:
Establish a consortium
(a) The applicant must establish a
consortium of training and technical
assistance (TA) providers or use an
existing network of providers to design
and implement a model experiential
learning program. An eligible
consortium must be comprised of a
designated lead entity that operates a
baccalaureate degree ASL-English
interpretation program that is
recognized and accredited by CCIE; and
(b) Members of the consortium must
be staffed by or have access to
experienced and certified interpreters,
interpreter educators, and trained
mentors with capability in providing
feedback and guidance to novice
interpreters, and in serving as language
models; and who are geographically
dispersed across the country, including
the territories, or are able to provide
training, TA, and mentoring remotely to
broad sections of the country.
Training Activities
(a) In years one and two, design and
implement an experiential learning
program that is based upon promising
and best practices or modules in the
preparation of novice interpreters to
become certified interpreters. The
program design must, at a minimum:
(1) Ensure that all activities are
offered at no-cost to participants during
the program.
(2) Include a team comprised of native
language users, qualified interpreters,
and trained mentors to partner with
novice interpreters during and after
successful completion of the
experiential learning program. Roles for
team members must include but are not
limited to:
(i) Native language users who will
serve as language models;
(ii) Qualified interpreters who will act
in an advisory role by observing,
providing feedback, and discussing the
novice interpreter’s ability to accurately
interpret spoken English into ASL and
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ASL into spoken English in a variety of
situations for a range of consumers; and
(iii) Provide mentoring to novice
interpreters, as needed. This may
include one-on-one instruction to
address specific areas identified by the
advisor as needing further practice, as
well as offering tools, resources, and
guidance to novice interpreters to
prepare them for potential challenges
they may encounter as they grow and
advance in the profession. One-on-one
instruction may address, but is not
limited to, meaning transfer (e.g.,
accurately providing an equivalent
message and/or appropriately handling
register), ethical behavior, meeting the
consumer’s linguistic preference,
managing the flow of information (e.g.,
pace, density, turn-taking), and other
related aspects of the interpreting task.
(3) Provide multiple learning
opportunities, such as an internship
with a community program, mentoring,
and intensive site-specific work.
Intensive site-specific work may task a
novice interpreter, under close direction
from the advisor interpreter, with
providing interpreting services to deaf
individuals employed at a work site, or
to deaf students taking courses at
college or enrolled in an apprenticeship
program. Other learning modalities may
be proposed and must include adequate
justification.
(4) Emphasize innovative
instructional delivery methods, such as
distance learning or block scheduling
(i.e., a type of academic scheduling that
offers students fewer classes per day for
longer periods of time) that would allow
novice interpreters to more easily
participate in the program (i.e.,
participants who need to work while in
the program, have child care or elder
care considerations, or live in
geographically isolated areas);
(5) Provide experiential learning that
engages novice interpreters with
different learning styles;
(6) Provide interpreting experiences
with a variety of deaf consumers who
have different linguistic and
communication needs and preferences,
and are located in different settings,
including VR settings (e.g., VR
counseling, assessments, job-related
services, training, pre-employment
transition services, transition services,
post-employment services, etc.),
American Job Centers, and other
relevant workforce partner locations;
(7) Require novice interpreters to
observe, discuss, and reflect on the work
of the advisor interpreter;
(8) Require novice interpreters to
interpret in increasingly more complex
and demanding situations. The advisor
interpreter must provide written and
E:\FR\FM\07APP1.SGM
07APP1
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
oral feedback that includes strengths
and areas of improvement, as well as a
discussion with the novice interpreter
about interpretation options, ethical
behavior, and how best to meet the
communication needs of a particular
consumer; and
(b) Pilot the experiential learning
program in a single site by year two and
expand to additional sites beginning in
year three. Applicants must:
(1) Identify at least three existing
baccalaureate degree ASL-English
interpretation programs to serve as the
pilot sites. The baccalaureate programs
must use a curriculum design that is
based upon current best practices in the
ASL-English Interpreter Education
profession;
(2) Identify cohorts for each pilot site
and provide a plan to ensure that at
least one cohort is completed in each
pilot site prior to the end of the project
period. The cohorts must comprise
graduates from baccalaureate degree
ASL-English interpretation programs
who are preparing for, or have not
passed, the NIC knowledge and
performance exams and who intend to
work as interpreters. Applicants may
determine the number of cohorts for
each pilot site as well as the number of
participants in each cohort;
(3) Establish additional criteria for
selection in the program. This may
include, but is not limited to,
submission of an application, relevant
assessments, interviews with
prospective participants, and
recommendations from faculty at
baccalaureate degree ASL-English
interpretation programs;
(c) Conduct a formative and
summative evaluation. At a minimum,
this must include:
(1) An assessment of participant
outcomes from each cohort that
includes, at a minimum, level of
knowledge and practical skill levels
using pre- and post-assessments;
feedback from novice interpreters, from
interpreter advisors, including written
feedback from observed interpreting
situations, from deaf consumers, from
trained mentors, including written
feedback from mentoring sessions, and
from others, as appropriate;
(2) Clear and specific measureable
outcomes that include, but are not
limited to:
(i) Improvement in specific linguistic
competencies, as identified by the
applicant, in English and ASL;
(ii) Improvement in specific
competencies, as identified by the
applicant, in ASL-English
interpretation;
(iii) Outcomes in achieving national
certification; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:16 Apr 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
(iv) The length of time for novice
interpreters to become nationally
certified sign language interpreters after
participating in this project compared to
the national average of 19–24 months.
Technical Assistance and
Dissemination Activities
Conduct TA and dissemination
activities that must include:
(a) Preparing and broadly
disseminating TA materials related to
practices that are promising or
supported by evidence and successful
strategies for working with novice
interpreters;
(b) Establishing and maintaining a
state-of-the-art information technology
(IT) platform sufficient to support
Webinars, teleconferences, video
conferences, and other virtual methods
of dissemination of information and TA.
Note: All products produced by the Center
must meet government- and industryrecognized standards for accessibility,
including section 508 of the Rehabilitation
Act.
(c) Developing and maintaining a
state-of-the-art archiving and
dissemination system that—
(1) Provides a central location for later
use of TA products, including curricula,
audiovisual materials, Webinars,
examples of practices that are promising
or supported by evidence, and any other
relevant TA products; and
(2) Is open and available to the public.
(d) Provides a minimum of two
Webinars or video conferences over the
course of the project to describe and
disseminate information to the field
about results, challenges, solutions, and
practices that are promising or
supported by evidence.
Note: In meeting the requirements for
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this section, the
Center either may develop new platforms or
systems or may modify existing platforms or
systems, so long as the requirements of this
priority are met.
Coordination Activities
(a) Establish an advisory committee.
To effectively implement the Training
Activities section of this priority, the
applicant must establish an advisory
committee that meets at least semiannually. The advisory committee must
include representation from all affected
stakeholder groups (i.e., interpreters,
interpreter training programs, deaf
individuals, and VR agencies) and may
include other relevant groups. The
advisory committee will advise on the
strategies for establishing sites to pilot
the experiential learning program, the
approaches to the experiential learning
program, modifications to experiential
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20271
learning activities, TA, sustainability
planning, evaluating the effectiveness of
the program, as well as other relevant
areas as determined by the consortium.
(b) Establish one or more
communities of practice 2 that focus on
project activities in this priority and that
act as vehicles for communication and
exchange of information among
participants in the experiential learning
program, as well as other relevant
stakeholders;
(c) Communicate, collaborate, and
coordinate, on an ongoing basis, with
other relevant Department-funded
projects, as applicable; and
(d) Maintain ongoing communication
with the RSA project officer and other
RSA staff as required.
Application Requirements
To be funded under this priority,
applicants must meet the application
requirements in this priority. RSA
encourages innovative approaches to
meet the following requirements:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Significance of the Project,’’ how the
proposed project will address the need
for nationally certified sign language
interpreters. To meet this requirement,
the applicant must:
(1) Demonstrate knowledge of
English/ASL competencies that novice
interpreters must possess in order to
enter and to complete an experiential
learning program and, at the end of the
program, to successfully obtain national
certification;
(2) Demonstrate knowledge of
practices that are promising or
supported by evidence in training
novice interpreters; and
(3) Demonstrate knowledge of
practices that are promising or
supported by evidence in providing
experiential learning.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Quality of Project Services,’’ how the
proposed project will—
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment
for members of groups that have
historically been underrepresented
based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability in accessing
postsecondary education and training.
(2) Identify the needs of intended
recipients of training; and
2 A community of practice (CoP) is a group of
people who work together to solve a persistent
problem or to improve practice in an area that is
important to them and who deepen their knowledge
and expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis.
CoPs exist in many forms, some large in scale that
deal with complex problems, others small in scale
that focus on a problem at a very specific level. For
more information on communities of practice, see:
www.tadnet.org/pages/510.
E:\FR\FM\07APP1.SGM
07APP1
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
20272
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(3) Ensure that project activities and
products meet the needs of the intended
recipients by creating materials in
formats and languages that are
accessible;
(4) Achieve its goals, objectives, and
intended outcomes. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must identify
and provide—
(i) Measurable intended project
outcomes;
(ii) Evidence of an existing
Memorandum of Understanding or a
Letter of Intent between the Center and
proposed training and TA providers to
establish a consortium that includes a
description of each proposed partner’s
anticipated commitment of financial or
in-kind resources (if any), how each
proposed provider’s current and
proposed activities align with those of
the proposed project, how each
proposed provider will be held
accountable under the proposed
structure, and evidence to demonstrate
a working relationship between the
applicant and its proposed partners and
key stakeholders and other relevant
groups; and
(iii) A plan for communicating,
collaborating, and coordinating with an
advisory committee; key staff in State
VR agencies, such as State Coordinators
for the Deaf; State and local partner
programs; Registry of Interpreters for the
Deaf, Inc.; RSA partners, such as the
Council of State Administrators of
Vocational Rehabilitation, the National
Council of State Agencies for the Blind;
and relevant programs within the Office
of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services (OSERS).
(3) Use a conceptual framework to
design experiential learning activities,
describing any underlying concepts,
assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or
theories, as well as the presumed
relationships or linkages among these
variables and any empirical support for
this framework.
(4) Be based on current research and
make use of practices that are promising
or supported by evidence. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must
describe—
(i) How the current research about
adult learning principles and
implementation science will inform the
proposed TA; and
(ii) How the proposed project will
incorporate current research and
practices that are promising or
supported by evidence in the
development and delivery of its
products and services.
(5) Develop products and provide
services that are of high quality and
sufficient intensity and duration to
achieve the intended outcomes of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:16 Apr 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
proposed project. To address this
requirement, the applicant must
describe its proposed activities to
identify or develop the knowledge base
for practices that are promising or
supported by evidence in experiential
learning for novice interpreters;
(6) Develop products and implement
services to maximize the project’s
efficiency. To address this requirement,
the applicant must describe—
(i) How the proposed project will use
technology to achieve the intended
project outcomes; and
(ii) With whom the proposed project
will collaborate and the intended
outcomes of this collaboration.
(c) In the narrative section of the
application under ‘‘Quality of the
Evaluation Plan,’’ include an evaluation
plan for the project. To address this
requirement, the applicant must
describe—
(1) Evaluation methodologies,
including instruments, data collection
methods, and analyses that will be used
to evaluate the project;
(2) Measures of progress in
implementation, including the extent to
which the project’s activities and
products have reached their target
populations; intended outcomes or
results of the project’s activities in order
to evaluate those activities; and how
well the goals and objectives of the
proposed project, as described in its
logic model,3 have been met;
(3) How the evaluation plan will be
implemented and revised, as needed,
during the project. The applicant must
designate at least one individual with
sufficient dedicated time, experience in
evaluation, and knowledge of the
project to support the design and
implementation of the evaluation. Tasks
may include, but are not limited to,
coordinating with the advisory
committee and RSA to revise the logic
model to provide for a more
comprehensive measurement of
implementation and outcomes, to reflect
any changes or clarifications to the logic
model discussed at the kick-off meeting,
and to revise the evaluation design and
instrumentation proposed in the grant
application consistent with the logic
model (e.g., developing quantitative or
qualitative data collections that permit
both the collection of progress data and
the assessment of project outcomes);
(4) The standards and targets for
determining effectiveness;
(5) How evaluation results will be
used to examine the effectiveness of
3 A logic model communicates how the project
will achieve its intended outcomes and provides a
framework for both the formative and summative
evaluations of the project.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
implementation and progress toward
achieving the intended outcomes; and
(6) How the methods of evaluation
will produce quantitative and
qualitative data that demonstrate
whether the project activities achieved
their intended outcomes.
(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Adequacy of Project Resources,’’
how—
(1) The proposed project will
encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of
groups that have historically been
underrepresented based on race, color,
national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project
personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications
and experience to provide experiential
learning to novice interpreters and to
achieve the project’s intended
outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key
partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable
in relation to the anticipated results and
benefits;
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Quality of the Management Plan,’’
how—
(1) The proposed management plan
will ensure that the project’s intended
outcomes will be achieved on time and
within budget. To address this
requirement, the applicant must
describe—
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for
key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for
accomplishing the project tasks.
(2) Key project personnel and any
consultants and subcontractors
allocated to the project and how these
allocations are appropriate and adequate
to achieve the project’s intended
outcomes, including an assurance that
such personnel will have adequate
availability to ensure timely
communications with stakeholders and
RSA;
(3) The proposed management plan
will ensure that the products and
services provided are of high quality;
and
(4) The proposed project will benefit
from a diversity of perspectives,
including the advisory committee, as
well as other relevant groups in its
development and operation.
(f) Address the following application
requirements. The applicant must—
(1) Include, in Appendix A, a logic
model that depicts, at a minimum, the
E:\FR\FM\07APP1.SGM
07APP1
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
goals, activities, outputs, and intended
outcomes of the proposed project;
(2) Include, in Appendix A, a
Memorandum of Understanding or a
Letter of Intent between the Center and
the proposed training and TA providers;
(3) Include, in Appendix A, a
conceptual framework for the project;
(4) Include, in Appendix A, personloading charts and timelines as
applicable, to illustrate the management
plan described in the narrative;
(5) Include, in the budget, attendance
at the following:
(i) A one and one-half day kick-off
meeting in Washington, DC, after receipt
of the award;
(ii) An annual planning meeting in
Washington, DC, with the RSA project
officer and other relevant RSA staff
during each subsequent year of the
project period; and
(iii) A one-day intensive review
meeting in Washington, DC, during the
third quarter of the third year of the
project period.
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 priority: We will announce the
final priority in a notice in the Federal
Register. We will determine the final
priority 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:16 Apr 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
to use this priority, we invite applications
through a notice in the Federal Register.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
As part of its continuing effort to
reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, the Department provides the
general public and Federal agencies
with an opportunity to comment on
proposed and continuing collections of
information in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps
ensure that: the public understands the
Department’s collection instructions,
respondents can provide the requested
data in the desired format, reporting
burden (time and financial resources) is
minimized, collection instruments are
clearly understood, and the Department
can properly assess the impact of
collection requirements on respondents.
These proposed priorities contain
information collection requirements that
are approved by OMB under the
National Interpreter Education program
1820–0018; this proposed regulation
does not affect the currently approved
data collection.
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 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 proposed
regulatory action under Executive Order
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20273
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 would 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 proposed priority
only on a reasoned determination that
its benefits justify its costs. In choosing
among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those
approaches that would 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 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, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this
regulatory action. The potential costs
are those resulting from statutory
E:\FR\FM\07APP1.SGM
07APP1
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
20274
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for
administering the Department’s
programs and activities.
Through this priority, experiential
learning and TA will be provided to
novice interpreters in order for them to
achieve national certification. These
activities will help interpreters to more
effectively meet the communication
needs of individuals who are deaf or
hard of hearing and individuals who are
Deaf-Blind. The training ultimately will
improve the quality of VR services and
the competitive integrated employment
outcomes achieved by individuals with
disabilities. This priority would
promote the efficient and effective use
of Federal funds.
Intergovernmental Review: This
program is subject to Executive Order
12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR
part 79. One of the objectives of the
Executive order is to foster an
intergovernmental partnership and a
strengthened federalism. The Executive
order relies on processes developed by
State and local governments for
coordination and review of proposed
Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early
notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
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 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:16 Apr 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
Dated: April 1, 2016.
Michael K. Yudin,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2016–07933 Filed 4–6–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 258
[FRL–9944–66–Region 9]
Tentative Determination To Approve
Site Specific Flexibility for Closure and
Monitoring of the Picacho Landfill
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, is making a tentative
determination to approve two Site
Specific Flexibility Requests (SSFRs)
from Imperial County (County or
Imperial County) to close and monitor
the Picacho Solid Waste Landfill
(Picacho Landfill or Landfill). The
Picacho Landfill is a commercial
municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF)
operated by Imperial County from 1977
to the present on the Quechan Indian
Tribe of the Fort Yuma Indian
Reservation in California.
Imperial County is seeking approval
from EPA to use an alternative final
cover and to modify the prescribed list
of detection-monitoring parameters for
ongoing monitoring. The Quechan
Indian Tribe (Tribe) reviewed the
proposed SSFRs and determined that
they met tribal requirements. EPA is
now seeking public comment on EPA’s
tentative determination to approve the
SSFRs.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received on
or before May 9, 2016. If sufficient
public interest is expressed by April 22,
2016, EPA will hold a public hearing at
the Quechan Community Center,
located at 604 Picacho Rd., in
Winterhaven, CA on May 9, 2016 from
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. If by April 22,
2016 EPA does not receive information
indicating sufficient public interest for a
public hearing, EPA may cancel the
public hearing with no further notice. If
you are interested in attending the
public hearing, contact Steve Wall at
(415) 972–3381 to verify that a hearing
will be held.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
RCRA–2015–0445, by one of the
following methods:
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: wall.steve@epa.gov.
• Fax: (415) 947–3564.
• Mail: Steve Wall, Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, Mail code:
LND 2–3, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes
information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
If you submit an electronic comment,
EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
email, Web site submittal, disk or CD–
ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or email. See
below for instructions regarding
submitting CBI.
The https://www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment.
If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through
https://www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet.
Electronic files should avoid the use
of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Tips for Submitting Comments to EPA
1. Preparing Your Comments
When submitting comments,
remember to:
• Identify the rulemaking by Docket
ID No. EPA–R09–RCRA–2015–0445 and
other identifying information (subject
heading, Federal Register date and page
number).
• Explain why you agree or disagree,
suggest alternatives, and provide
suggestions for substitute language for
your requested changes.
E:\FR\FM\07APP1.SGM
07APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20268-20274]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07933]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter III
[Docket ID ED-2016-OSERS-0005; CFDA Number: 84.160C.]
Proposed Priority--Training of Interpreters for Individuals Who
Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing and Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind program
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Proposed priority.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services announces a priority under the Training of
Interpreters for Individuals Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing and
Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind program. The Assistant Secretary may use
this priority for competitions in fiscal year 2016 and later years. We
take this action to provide training and technical assistance to better
prepare novice interpreters to become highly qualified nationally
certified sign language interpreters.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before May 9, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not
accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after
the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies,
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to
submit your comments electronically. Information on using
Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents,
submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site
under the ``help'' tab.
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you
mail or deliver your comments about these proposed regulations, address
them to Kristen Rhinehart-Fernandez, U.S. Department of Education, 400
Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5062, Potomac Center Plaza (PCP), Washington,
DC 20202-5076.
Privacy Note: The Department's policy is to make all comments
received from members of the public available for public viewing in
their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to
include in their comments only information that they wish to make
publicly available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen Rhinehart-Fernandez.
Telephone: (202) 245-6103 or by email: Kristen.Rhinehart@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:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
this notice. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in
developing the notice of final priority, we urge you to identify
clearly the specific section of the proposed priority that each comment
addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and their overall
requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result from this
proposed priority. 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.
Specific Issues Open for Comment:
In addition to your general comments and recommended
clarifications, we seek input on the proposed design of the
Experiential Learning Model Demonstration Center for Novice
Interpreters and Baccalaureate Degree ASL-English Interpretation
Programs (Center) and expectations for implementation. We are
particularly interested in your feedback on the following questions:
Are the proposed required project activities appropriate?
Are there any additional project activities beyond those included in
the proposed priority that should be considered? For example, are there
any specific activities that may be strongly associated with long-term
success for ASL-English interpreters that we have not included? If so,
please specify what additional activities should be required and why.
[[Page 20269]]
Under the Training Activities section of the proposed
priority, we proposed a team of individuals to work with novice
interpreters. Are the proposed roles for interpreter advisors and
trained mentors clear and appropriate? Should the roles and
responsibilities of the interpreter advisor and mentor be changed or
combined? In your experience, how might qualified interpreters work
with novice interpreters differently than trained mentors? Should these
roles be more or less prescriptive than what we have outlined in the
proposed priority?
In the proposed priority, the Center is expected to plan
and design the curriculum, develop training modules, and implement a
pilot experiential learning program within the first two years of the
grant period. Is this timeline reasonable? If not, what timeline should
be required for these expected project deliverables?
In addition to national certification, such as, for
example, the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID) National
Interpreter Certification (NIC) tests, what measures for assessing the
improvement in a novice interpreter's skills should be required?
How many cohorts should be required to complete the
experiential learning program within the five-year project period?
Should the Department require a certain number of novice interpreters
per cohort, and, if so, how many?
Beyond requiring a logic model and a project evaluation,
are there any unique or additional strategies to ensure that the
program evaluation framework is infused throughout the planning,
designing, and implementation of the experiential learning curriculum
that the Department should include? If so, please specify.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about this proposed priority by accessing Regulations.gov. You
may also inspect the comments in room 5062, 550 12th Street SW., PCP,
Washington, DC 20202-5076, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00
p.m., Washington, DC time, Monday through Friday of each week except
Federal holidays. Please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
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: Under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
(Rehabilitation Act), as amended by the Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act (WIOA), the Rehabilitation Services Administration
(RSA) makes grants to public and private nonprofit agencies and
organizations, including institutions of higher education, to establish
interpreter training programs or to provide financial assistance for
ongoing interpreter training programs to train a sufficient number of
qualified interpreters throughout the country. The grants are designed
to train interpreters to effectively interpret and transliterate using
spoken, visual, and tactile modes of communication; ensure the
maintenance of the interpreting skills of qualified interpreters; and
provide opportunities for interpreters to improve their skills in order
to meet both the highest standards approved by certifying associations
and the communication needs of individuals who are deaf or hard of
hearing and individuals who are deaf-blind.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 772(a) and (f).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 396.
Proposed Priority:
This notice contains one proposed priority.
Experiential Learning Model Demonstration Center for Novice
Interpreters and Baccalaureate Degree ASL-English Interpretation
Programs.
Background:
Over the last 20 years, the fields of interpreting and interpreter
training have changed significantly in response to the evolving needs
of deaf \1\ children and adults in the United States, which include
deaf consumers of the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) system. The need
for interpreting services continues to exceed the available supply of
qualified interpreters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As used in this notice, the word ``deaf'' refers to (1)
`deaf' and `Deaf' people, i.e. to the condition of deafness; (2) to
`deaf, hard of hearing, and Deaf-Blind'; and (3) to individuals who
are culturally Deaf and who use American Sign Language (ASL).
``Deaf'' refers only to the third group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interpreters must be qualified to work with both individuals with a
range of linguistic competencies from a variety of cultural backgrounds
and individuals with disabilities. For example, the first language of
many deaf individuals is either spoken English or a foreign spoken
language, and their second language is ASL. This is, in part, a result
of advances in medical treatments, such as an increase in the early
detection and intervention of hearing loss in newborns and an increase
in the use of cochlear implants. In addition, deaf individuals who have
co-occurring disabilities (including co-occurring disabilities that
affect speech and language skills, upper extremity motor coordination,
and cognition) likely require specialized supports to experience
linguistic and communication access to the general environment. Further
still, there are an increasing number of deaf individuals from minority
and immigrant communities who have unique characteristics related to
culture, language, family structure, income and socioeconomic
background, and refugee experience, as well as complex and diverse
communication needs (Cogen and Cokely). These shifts in how deaf
individuals acquire and use language make the task of interpreting more
difficult.
In addition, expanding requirements in video relay interpreting and
video remote interpreting, the establishment of new ``national''
standards and credentials for interpreters to work in specific settings
(e.g., interpreting in mental health and legal settings), and the
development of State-specific licensure, certification, registration,
or other requirements (e.g., background and criminal checks to work in
certain facilities) all have put a strain on the availability of
qualified interpreters.
Finally, interpreters need additional education, training, and
experience in order to meet certification standards. For example, in
July 2012, a precondition was added for candidates sitting for RID
National Interpreter Certification Test requiring them to have, at a
minimum, a baccalaureate degree in any field or major, or a
demonstrated educational equivalency, before being permitted to take
the examination.
In 2014, RID awarded 280 new credentials, and of those, 186
represented the NIC. RID reported an 87 percent pass rate for the
knowledge exam but only a 26 percent pass rate for the performance
exam. This problem is exacerbated by the length of time between
graduating from an ASL-English Interpretation program and achieving
national certification. On average, the length of time is 19-24 months
(Cogen and Cokely, 2015). This could be longer if a candidate does not
initially pass the NIC exam, due to a mandatory six-month waiting
period before a candidate is eligible to retest.
Many graduates find work within six months to one year of
graduation, but in most cases, these interpreting assignments are too
complex and are therefore inappropriate for their skill
[[Page 20270]]
levels. These situations provide little or no opportunities for support
and professional growth. Additional education, training, and experience
are needed for novice interpreters to bridge this graduation-to-
credential gap and to gain sufficient skills to interpret effectively.
In sum, the pool of qualified interpreters is insufficient to meet
the needs of deaf consumers in the United States. To address this
problem, the Assistant Secretary proposes a priority to establish a
model demonstration center to better prepare novice interpreters to
become nationally certified sign language interpreters.
Interpreters must also be able to understand and communicate
proficiently using technical vocabulary and highly specialized
discourse in a variety of complex subject matters in both English and
ASL. Training, even for experienced interpreters, in specialized
settings is needed, and for this reason, we are publishing a notice of
proposed priority focusing on interpreter training in specialized areas
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
References:
Cogen, Cathy, M.Ed., and Cokely, Dennis, Ph.D., ``Preparing
Interpreters for Tomorrow: Report on a Study of Emerging Trends in
Interpreting and Implications for Interpreter Education'' (National
Interpreter Education Center at Northeastern University, January
2015). Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf ``Fiscal Year 2014
Annual Report'' available at www.rid.org/2014-annual-report/#certification
Proposed Priority:
The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement for
the establishment of a model demonstration center (Center) to: (1)
Develop an experiential learning program that could be implemented
through baccalaureate degree ASL-English programs or through partner
organizations, such as community-based organizations, advocacy
organizations, or commissions for the Deaf or deaf-blind that work with
baccalaureate degree ASL-English programs to provide work experiences
and mentoring; (2) pilot the experiential learning program in three
baccalaureate degree ASL-English programs or partner organizations and
evaluate the results; and (3) disseminate practices that are promising
or supported by evidence, examples, and lessons learned.
The Center must be designed to achieve, at a minimum, the following
outcomes:
(a) Increase the number of certified interpreters.
(b) Reduce the average length of time it takes for novice
interpreters to become nationally certified after graduating from
baccalaureate degree ASL-English interpretation programs; and
(c) Increase the average number of hours that novice interpreters,
through the experiential learning program, interact with and learn from
the local deaf community.
Project Activities
To meet the requirements of this priority, the Center must, at a
minimum, conduct the following activities:
Establish a consortium
(a) The applicant must establish a consortium of training and
technical assistance (TA) providers or use an existing network of
providers to design and implement a model experiential learning
program. An eligible consortium must be comprised of a designated lead
entity that operates a baccalaureate degree ASL-English interpretation
program that is recognized and accredited by CCIE; and
(b) Members of the consortium must be staffed by or have access to
experienced and certified interpreters, interpreter educators, and
trained mentors with capability in providing feedback and guidance to
novice interpreters, and in serving as language models; and who are
geographically dispersed across the country, including the territories,
or are able to provide training, TA, and mentoring remotely to broad
sections of the country.
Training Activities
(a) In years one and two, design and implement an experiential
learning program that is based upon promising and best practices or
modules in the preparation of novice interpreters to become certified
interpreters. The program design must, at a minimum:
(1) Ensure that all activities are offered at no-cost to
participants during the program.
(2) Include a team comprised of native language users, qualified
interpreters, and trained mentors to partner with novice interpreters
during and after successful completion of the experiential learning
program. Roles for team members must include but are not limited to:
(i) Native language users who will serve as language models;
(ii) Qualified interpreters who will act in an advisory role by
observing, providing feedback, and discussing the novice interpreter's
ability to accurately interpret spoken English into ASL and ASL into
spoken English in a variety of situations for a range of consumers; and
(iii) Provide mentoring to novice interpreters, as needed. This may
include one-on-one instruction to address specific areas identified by
the advisor as needing further practice, as well as offering tools,
resources, and guidance to novice interpreters to prepare them for
potential challenges they may encounter as they grow and advance in the
profession. One-on-one instruction may address, but is not limited to,
meaning transfer (e.g., accurately providing an equivalent message and/
or appropriately handling register), ethical behavior, meeting the
consumer's linguistic preference, managing the flow of information
(e.g., pace, density, turn-taking), and other related aspects of the
interpreting task.
(3) Provide multiple learning opportunities, such as an internship
with a community program, mentoring, and intensive site-specific work.
Intensive site-specific work may task a novice interpreter, under close
direction from the advisor interpreter, with providing interpreting
services to deaf individuals employed at a work site, or to deaf
students taking courses at college or enrolled in an apprenticeship
program. Other learning modalities may be proposed and must include
adequate justification.
(4) Emphasize innovative instructional delivery methods, such as
distance learning or block scheduling (i.e., a type of academic
scheduling that offers students fewer classes per day for longer
periods of time) that would allow novice interpreters to more easily
participate in the program (i.e., participants who need to work while
in the program, have child care or elder care considerations, or live
in geographically isolated areas);
(5) Provide experiential learning that engages novice interpreters
with different learning styles;
(6) Provide interpreting experiences with a variety of deaf
consumers who have different linguistic and communication needs and
preferences, and are located in different settings, including VR
settings (e.g., VR counseling, assessments, job-related services,
training, pre-employment transition services, transition services,
post-employment services, etc.), American Job Centers, and other
relevant workforce partner locations;
(7) Require novice interpreters to observe, discuss, and reflect on
the work of the advisor interpreter;
(8) Require novice interpreters to interpret in increasingly more
complex and demanding situations. The advisor interpreter must provide
written and
[[Page 20271]]
oral feedback that includes strengths and areas of improvement, as well
as a discussion with the novice interpreter about interpretation
options, ethical behavior, and how best to meet the communication needs
of a particular consumer; and
(b) Pilot the experiential learning program in a single site by
year two and expand to additional sites beginning in year three.
Applicants must:
(1) Identify at least three existing baccalaureate degree ASL-
English interpretation programs to serve as the pilot sites. The
baccalaureate programs must use a curriculum design that is based upon
current best practices in the ASL-English Interpreter Education
profession;
(2) Identify cohorts for each pilot site and provide a plan to
ensure that at least one cohort is completed in each pilot site prior
to the end of the project period. The cohorts must comprise graduates
from baccalaureate degree ASL-English interpretation programs who are
preparing for, or have not passed, the NIC knowledge and performance
exams and who intend to work as interpreters. Applicants may determine
the number of cohorts for each pilot site as well as the number of
participants in each cohort;
(3) Establish additional criteria for selection in the program.
This may include, but is not limited to, submission of an application,
relevant assessments, interviews with prospective participants, and
recommendations from faculty at baccalaureate degree ASL-English
interpretation programs;
(c) Conduct a formative and summative evaluation. At a minimum,
this must include:
(1) An assessment of participant outcomes from each cohort that
includes, at a minimum, level of knowledge and practical skill levels
using pre- and post-assessments; feedback from novice interpreters,
from interpreter advisors, including written feedback from observed
interpreting situations, from deaf consumers, from trained mentors,
including written feedback from mentoring sessions, and from others, as
appropriate;
(2) Clear and specific measureable outcomes that include, but are
not limited to:
(i) Improvement in specific linguistic competencies, as identified
by the applicant, in English and ASL;
(ii) Improvement in specific competencies, as identified by the
applicant, in ASL-English interpretation;
(iii) Outcomes in achieving national certification; and
(iv) The length of time for novice interpreters to become
nationally certified sign language interpreters after participating in
this project compared to the national average of 19-24 months.
Technical Assistance and Dissemination Activities
Conduct TA and dissemination activities that must include:
(a) Preparing and broadly disseminating TA materials related to
practices that are promising or supported by evidence and successful
strategies for working with novice interpreters;
(b) Establishing and maintaining a state-of-the-art information
technology (IT) platform sufficient to support Webinars,
teleconferences, video conferences, and other virtual methods of
dissemination of information and TA.
Note: All products produced by the Center must meet government-
and industry-recognized standards for accessibility, including
section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act.
(c) Developing and maintaining a state-of-the-art archiving and
dissemination system that--
(1) Provides a central location for later use of TA products,
including curricula, audiovisual materials, Webinars, examples of
practices that are promising or supported by evidence, and any other
relevant TA products; and
(2) Is open and available to the public.
(d) Provides a minimum of two Webinars or video conferences over
the course of the project to describe and disseminate information to
the field about results, challenges, solutions, and practices that are
promising or supported by evidence.
Note: In meeting the requirements for paragraphs (a), (b), and
(c) of this section, the Center either may develop new platforms or
systems or may modify existing platforms or systems, so long as the
requirements of this priority are met.
Coordination Activities
(a) Establish an advisory committee. To effectively implement the
Training Activities section of this priority, the applicant must
establish an advisory committee that meets at least semi-annually. The
advisory committee must include representation from all affected
stakeholder groups (i.e., interpreters, interpreter training programs,
deaf individuals, and VR agencies) and may include other relevant
groups. The advisory committee will advise on the strategies for
establishing sites to pilot the experiential learning program, the
approaches to the experiential learning program, modifications to
experiential learning activities, TA, sustainability planning,
evaluating the effectiveness of the program, as well as other relevant
areas as determined by the consortium.
(b) Establish one or more communities of practice \2\ that focus on
project activities in this priority and that act as vehicles for
communication and exchange of information among participants in the
experiential learning program, as well as other relevant stakeholders;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ A community of practice (CoP) is a group of people who work
together to solve a persistent problem or to improve practice in an
area that is important to them and who deepen their knowledge and
expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis. CoPs exist in many
forms, some large in scale that deal with complex problems, others
small in scale that focus on a problem at a very specific level. For
more information on communities of practice, see: www.tadnet.org/pages/510.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Communicate, collaborate, and coordinate, on an ongoing basis,
with other relevant Department-funded projects, as applicable; and
(d) Maintain ongoing communication with the RSA project officer and
other RSA staff as required.
Application Requirements
To be funded under this priority, applicants must meet the
application requirements in this priority. RSA encourages innovative
approaches to meet the following requirements:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance of the Project,'' how the proposed project will address
the need for nationally certified sign language interpreters. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must:
(1) Demonstrate knowledge of English/ASL competencies that novice
interpreters must possess in order to enter and to complete an
experiential learning program and, at the end of the program, to
successfully obtain national certification;
(2) Demonstrate knowledge of practices that are promising or
supported by evidence in training novice interpreters; and
(3) Demonstrate knowledge of practices that are promising or
supported by evidence in providing experiential learning.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of Project Services,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that
have historically been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability in accessing postsecondary education
and training.
(2) Identify the needs of intended recipients of training; and
[[Page 20272]]
(3) Ensure that project activities and products meet the needs of
the intended recipients by creating materials in formats and languages
that are accessible;
(4) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must identify and provide--
(i) Measurable intended project outcomes;
(ii) Evidence of an existing Memorandum of Understanding or a
Letter of Intent between the Center and proposed training and TA
providers to establish a consortium that includes a description of each
proposed partner's anticipated commitment of financial or in-kind
resources (if any), how each proposed provider's current and proposed
activities align with those of the proposed project, how each proposed
provider will be held accountable under the proposed structure, and
evidence to demonstrate a working relationship between the applicant
and its proposed partners and key stakeholders and other relevant
groups; and
(iii) A plan for communicating, collaborating, and coordinating
with an advisory committee; key staff in State VR agencies, such as
State Coordinators for the Deaf; State and local partner programs;
Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc.; RSA partners, such as the
Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation, the
National Council of State Agencies for the Blind; and relevant programs
within the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
(OSERS).
(3) Use a conceptual framework to design experiential learning
activities, describing any underlying concepts, assumptions,
expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed
relationships or linkages among these variables and any empirical
support for this framework.
(4) Be based on current research and make use of practices that are
promising or supported by evidence. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must describe--
(i) How the current research about adult learning principles and
implementation science will inform the proposed TA; and
(ii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research and
practices that are promising or supported by evidence in the
development and delivery of its products and services.
(5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality
and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes
of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant
must describe its proposed activities to identify or develop the
knowledge base for practices that are promising or supported by
evidence in experiential learning for novice interpreters;
(6) Develop products and implement services to maximize the
project's efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must
describe--
(i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the
intended project outcomes; and
(ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the
intended outcomes of this collaboration.
(c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of
the Evaluation Plan,'' include an evaluation plan for the project. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(1) Evaluation methodologies, including instruments, data
collection methods, and analyses that will be used to evaluate the
project;
(2) Measures of progress in implementation, including the extent to
which the project's activities and products have reached their target
populations; intended outcomes or results of the project's activities
in order to evaluate those activities; and how well the goals and
objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic model,\3\
have been met;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ A logic model communicates how the project will achieve its
intended outcomes and provides a framework for both the formative
and summative evaluations of the project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) How the evaluation plan will be implemented and revised, as
needed, during the project. The applicant must designate at least one
individual with sufficient dedicated time, experience in evaluation,
and knowledge of the project to support the design and implementation
of the evaluation. Tasks may include, but are not limited to,
coordinating with the advisory committee and RSA to revise the logic
model to provide for a more comprehensive measurement of implementation
and outcomes, to reflect any changes or clarifications to the logic
model discussed at the kick-off meeting, and to revise the evaluation
design and instrumentation proposed in the grant application consistent
with the logic model (e.g., developing quantitative or qualitative data
collections that permit both the collection of progress data and the
assessment of project outcomes);
(4) The standards and targets for determining effectiveness;
(5) How evaluation results will be used to examine the
effectiveness of implementation and progress toward achieving the
intended outcomes; and
(6) How the methods of evaluation will produce quantitative and
qualitative data that demonstrate whether the project activities
achieved their intended outcomes.
(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Adequacy of Project Resources,'' how--
(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of groups that have historically been
underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to provide
experiential learning to novice interpreters and to achieve the
project's intended outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the
anticipated results and benefits;
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the Management Plan,'' how--
(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks.
(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors
allocated to the project and how these allocations are appropriate and
adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes, including an
assurance that such personnel will have adequate availability to ensure
timely communications with stakeholders and RSA;
(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and
services provided are of high quality; and
(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of
perspectives, including the advisory committee, as well as other
relevant groups in its development and operation.
(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant
must--
(1) Include, in Appendix A, a logic model that depicts, at a
minimum, the
[[Page 20273]]
goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed
project;
(2) Include, in Appendix A, a Memorandum of Understanding or a
Letter of Intent between the Center and the proposed training and TA
providers;
(3) Include, in Appendix A, a conceptual framework for the project;
(4) Include, in Appendix A, person-loading charts and timelines as
applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the
narrative;
(5) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:
(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC,
after receipt of the award;
(ii) An annual planning meeting in Washington, DC, with the RSA
project officer and other relevant RSA staff during each subsequent
year of the project period; and
(iii) A one-day intensive review meeting in Washington, DC, during
the third quarter of the third year of the project period.
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 priority: We will announce the final priority in a notice in
the Federal Register. We will determine the final priority 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 this priority, we invite applications through
a notice in the Federal Register.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, the Department provides the general public and Federal agencies
with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collections
of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps ensure that: the public
understands the Department's collection instructions, respondents can
provide the requested data in the desired format, reporting burden
(time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are
clearly understood, and the Department can properly assess the impact
of collection requirements on respondents.
These proposed priorities contain information collection
requirements that are approved by OMB under the National Interpreter
Education program 1820-0018; this proposed regulation does not affect
the currently approved data collection.
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 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 proposed 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 would 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 proposed priority only on a reasoned
determination that its benefits justify its costs. In choosing among
alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that
would 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 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, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
resulting from statutory
[[Page 20274]]
requirements and those we have determined as necessary for
administering the Department's programs and activities.
Through this priority, experiential learning and TA will be
provided to novice interpreters in order for them to achieve national
certification. These activities will help interpreters to more
effectively meet the communication needs of individuals who are deaf or
hard of hearing and individuals who are Deaf-Blind. The training
ultimately will improve the quality of VR services and the competitive
integrated employment outcomes achieved by individuals with
disabilities. This priority would promote the efficient and effective
use of Federal funds.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
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 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 1, 2016.
Michael K. Yudin,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2016-07933 Filed 4-6-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P