Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Proposed Rules 30011 

designated personnel. Designated 

personnel include commissioned, 

warrant, and petty officers of the U.S. 

Coast Guard. 

(d) Information broadcasts. The COTP 

Pittsburgh or a designated 

representative will inform the public 

through broadcast notices to mariners of 

the enforcement period for the safety 

zone as well as any changes in the 

planned schedule. 

Dated: April 27, 2015. 

L.N. Weaver, 

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of 

the Port Pittsburgh. 

[FR Doc. 2015–12553 Filed 5–22–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter III 

[Docket ID ED–2015–OSERS–0035] 

Proposed Priority—Rehabilitation 

Training: Institute on Rehabilitation 

Issues 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Proposed priority. 

[CFDA Number: 84.264C.] 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services proposes a priority to establish 

a topical Institute on Rehabilitation 

Issues (IRI). The Assistant Secretary may 

use this priority for competitions in 

fiscal year (FY) 2015 and later years. We 

take this action to provide training and 

technical assistance (TA) to improve the 

capacity of State Vocational 

Rehabilitation (VR) agencies and their 

partners to equip individuals with 

disabilities with the skills and 

competencies necessary to help them 

obtain competitive integrated 

employment. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before June 25, 2015. 

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 ‘‘Are you new to the site?’’ 

• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, 

or Hand Delivery: 

If you mail or deliver your comments 

about these proposed regulations, 

address them to Kristen RhinehartFernandez, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 5027, Potomac Center Plaza 

(PCP), Washington, DC 20202–2800. 

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. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about these proposed regulations by 

accessing Regulations.gov. You may also 

inspect the comments in person in 

Room 5042, 550 12th Street SW., PCP, 

Washington, DC 20202–2800, 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, as amended 

(the Rehabilitation Act), the 

Rehabilitation Services Administration 

(RSA) makes grants to States and public 

or nonprofit agencies and organizations 

(including institutions of higher 

education) to support projects that 

provide training, traineeships, and TA 

designed to increase the numbers of, 

and improve the skills of, qualified 

personnel (especially rehabilitation 

counselors) who are trained to: Provide 

vocational, medical, social, and 

psychological rehabilitation services to 

individuals with disabilities; assist 

individuals with communication and 

related disorders; and provide other 

services authorized under the 

Rehabilitation Act. 

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 772(a)(1). 

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 

CFR part 385. 

Proposed Priority: This notice 

contains one proposed priority. 

Institute on Rehabilitation Issues. 

Background: For more than 55 years, 

the Institute on Rehabilitation Issues 

(IRI) has been a national forum for 

discussing the important challenges 

facing the State VR Services Program. 

The IRI has also developed publications 

for use in training and TA for VR 

counselors, consumers, administrators, 

and other partners in the VR process. IRI 

publications have provided a unique 

perspective on emerging issues and 

promising practices in VR and are 

widely used by counselors and 

supervisors, human resource 

development (HRD) specialists, 

community-based rehabilitation service 

providers, administrators, researchers, 

and education and policy analysts (The 

George Washington University and 

University of Arkansas CURRENTS, 

2015). 

The Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act of 2014 (WIOA) places 

a greater emphasis on incorporating jobdriven training approaches into the VR 

service delivery system and on 

increasing employment outcomes for 

individuals with disabilities. One of 

these approaches includes working with 

employers to create on-the-job training 

opportunities that are responsive to the 

needs of employers and that provide 

individuals with skills that they need to 

obtain competitive integrated 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
30012 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

employment (Biden, 2014). An IRI that 

concentrates on the topic of on-the-job 

training activities for individuals with 

disabilities, such as paid internships, 

pre-apprenticeships, and registered 

apprenticeships, is both timely and 

critical for assisting State VR agencies in 

successfully incorporating job-driven 

training approaches. 

Individuals with disabilities continue 

to be underrepresented in the general 

workforce as well as in high-growth 

industries. Recent estimates reported by 

the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) 

from the Current Employment Statistics 

Survey (February 2015), show a labor 

force participation rate of 31.1 percent 

for people with disabilities ages 16 to 

64, compared to 75.7 percent for people 

without disabilities. Similarly, the 

unemployment rate for people with 

disabilities (12.2 percent) is more than 

double the rate for people without 

disabilities (5.7 percent). In addition, 

analyses conducted by the Council of 

Economic Advisors that matched BLS 

2012–2022 occupational projections 

with 2010–2012 American Community 

Survey data (Disability Community 

Project) revealed that people with 

disabilities who are employed tend to be 

in low-paying occupations and are 

overrepresented in slower-growing and 

declining occupations, which lowers 

their projected employment growth rate. 

People with disabilities are also 

underrepresented in 16 of the top 20 

fastest-growing occupations. 

Despite these trends, information 

indicates that there is substantial 

potential for job growth among people 

with disabilities in well-paying 

occupations over the coming decade. 

However, whether such potential will 

be realized depends in part on such 

factors as public and corporate policies 

regarding access to appropriate 

education, computer skills, and other 

training; disability income policies; and 

the availability of workplace 

accommodations and other employment 

supports. 

Research demonstrates that when 

students with disabilities participate in 

internships they increase their 

motivation to work toward a career, 

their knowledge of career options, their 

job skills, their ability to work with 

supervisors and coworkers, and their 

knowledge of accommodation strategies 

(Burgstahler and Bellman, 2009). 

Furthermore, apprenticeships are a 

proven path to employment and the 

middle class: 87 percent of apprentices 

are employed after completing their 

programs, and the average starting wage 

for apprenticeship graduates is over 

$50,000. Studies from other countries 

show that employers reap an average 

return of $1.47 in increased productivity 

and performance for every dollar they 

invest in apprenticeships. 

Unfortunately, too few American 

workers and employers have access to 

this proven training solution to prepare 

for better careers or to meet their needs 

for a skilled workforce (Biden, 2014). 

The IRI would provide State VR 

agencies with the tools and TA they 

need to connect individuals with 

disabilities to on-the-job training 

experiences in areas of growth or 

projected growth that align with their 

skill sets and interests and the needs 

and demands of business and industry. 

References: 

Biden, J. (2014). Ready to Work: Job-Driven 

Training and American Opportunity, 

July 2014. Available at: 

www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/

skills_report_072014_2.pdf. 

Burgstahler, S. and Bellman, S. (2009). 

Differences in Perceived Benefits of 

Internships for Subgroups of Students 

with Disabilities. Journal of Vocational 

Rehabilitation, 31, 155–165. 

The George Washington University and the 

University of Arkansas Center for the 

Utilization of Rehabilitation Resources 

for Education, Networking, Training and 

Service Institute on Rehabilitation Issues 

(UACURRENTS) (2015). Institute on 

Rehabilitation Issues. Available at: 

www.iriforum.org/mission.aspx. 

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). (2015). 

Economic New Release: Table A–6. 

Employment status of the civilian 

population by sex, age and disability 

status, not seasonally adjusted. Available 

at: www.bls.gov/news.release/

empsit.t06.htm. 

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Office of 

Disability Employment Policy (ODEP). 

New Disability Employment Data 

Resources. Economic Picture of the 

Disability Community Project. Available 

at: www.dol.gov/odep/topics/Disability

EmploymentStatistics.htm. 

Proposed Priority: The purpose of this 

priority is to fund a two-year 

cooperative agreement to establish a 

topical Institute on Rehabilitation Issues 

(IRI) that concentrates on the subject of 

on-the-job training activities for 

individuals with disabilities, such as 

paid internships, pre-apprenticeships, 

and registered apprenticeships. As a 

result of this concentrated IRI, State VR 

agencies will gain practical knowledge 

and technical assistance (TA) resources 

needed to increase the number of workbased learning experiences for 

individuals with disabilities in highgrowth fields that lead to competitive 

integrated employment,’’ as that term is 

defined in section 7(5) of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. 

Project Activities 

Under this priority, the IRI must, at a 

minimum, conduct the following 

activities: 

Knowledge Development Activities. 

(a) Within the first year, conduct a 

survey of State VR agencies and their 

partners to ascertain the number and 

types of on-the-job training activities 

currently available to individuals with 

disabilities and the outcomes associated 

with completion of those activities. 

(1) Collect, at a minimum, the 

following data: 

(i) The number of individuals with 

disabilities who are currently engaged 

in on-the-job training activities; 

(ii) The specific types of on-the-job 

training activities the individuals 

referred to in paragraph (a)(1)(i) are 

participating in, such as paid 

internships, pre-apprenticeships, and 

registered apprenticeships; 

(iii) The number of individuals with 

disabilities who participated in on-thejob-training activities in the last 36 

months; 

(iv) The number of individuals with 

disabilities who successfully completed 

on-the-job training activities in the last 

36 months, including the specific types 

of the on-the-job training; 

(v) The number of individuals with 

disabilities who obtained competitive 

integrated employment in the last 36 

months after successfully completing 

on-the-job training activities; 

(vi) The number of individuals with 

disabilities who did not successfully 

complete on-the-job training activities 

in the last 36 months; 

(vii) The number of State VR agency 

referrals to on-the-job training activities 

in the last 36 months; 

(viii) The number of on-the-job 

training activities developed through 

partnerships between the State VR 

agencies and businesses in the last 36 

months; 

(ix) The average length of time an 

individual with a disability participated 

in an on-the-job training activity in the 

last 36 months; and 

(x) The industries represented in the 

on-the-job training activities. 

(2) By the end of the first year, 

identify any State VR agencies that have 

not responded to the survey and followup with those agencies in order to 

ensure at least a 75 percent response 

rate. 

(b) In the beginning of the second 

year, follow up with State VR agencies 

that indicated that on-the-job training 

activities were developed through 

partnerships between the State VR 

agencies and businesses to collect: 

(1) Promising practices for creating, 

implementing, sustaining, and 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Proposed Rules 30013 

evaluating on-the-job training 

experiences for individuals with 

disabilities; and 

(2) Information about how on-the-job 

training activities have supported 

employer efforts to hire individuals 

with disabilities. 

(c) In the beginning of the second 

year, follow up with State VR Agencies 

that indicated that individuals with 

disabilities did not successfully 

complete on-the-job training activities to 

identify challenges or barriers that 

prevented successful completion of onthe-job training activities. 

(d) In the second year, conduct an 

analysis of the survey results and any 

additional information collected 

through follow-up and develop a 

summary report. 

(e) Within the first year, complete a 

literature review. 

(1) The literature review must gather, 

at a minimum: 

(i) Promising practices and examples 

for creating, implementing, sustaining, 

and evaluating on-the-job training 

activities for individuals with 

disabilities; 

(ii) Qualitative or quantitative data 

about how on-the-job training activities 

have supported employer efforts to hire 

individuals with disabilities; and 

(iii) Data on increased employment 

and retention outcomes that occurred 

after completing on-the-job training 

activities, especially for individuals 

with disabilities. 

(2) The literature review must 

consider the following resources: 

(i) Curriculum guides developed by 

RSA’s Job-Driven Vocational 

Rehabilitation Technical Assistance 

Center (JDVRTAC), as available; 

(ii) The Vice President’s report, 

‘‘Ready to Work: Job-Driven Training 

and American Opportunity,’’ July 2014; 

(iii) New disability employment data 

resources including, but not limited to, 

the Economic Picture of the Disability 

Community Project developed by the 

Office of Disability Employment Policy 

(ODEP); and 

(iv) Other relevant data sources and 

publications including, but not limited 

to, promising practices and examples of 

on-the-job training experiences 

developed through the public workforce 

development system, as well as through 

public-private partnerships. 

(f) Within the first six months of the 

second year, develop a compendium 

designed for use by all levels of State VR 

agency personnel. The compendium 

must, at a minimum: 

(1) Include promising practices, 

publications, examples, and other 

relevant materials that will support 

State VR agencies in creating, 

implementing, sustaining, and 

evaluating on-the-job training activities 

for individuals with disabilities; 

(2) Compare and contrast the data 

collected from the survey conducted in 

the first year of the grant with any 

research and data collected from the 

literature review so that State VR 

agencies can assess their progress 

towards incorporating job-driven 

training approaches into their service 

delivery system and increasing 

employment outcomes for individuals 

with disabilities; and 

(3) Include examples of how on-thejob training activities have supported 

employer efforts to hire individuals 

with disabilities. 

Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination Activities 

(a) Provide two TA Webinars that are 

recorded, archived, and made available 

to State VR agencies, providers of 

training, and relevant partners. The 

Webinars must focus on the survey that 

must be conducted within the first year 

of the grant and include detail such as 

the purpose of the survey, its design and 

methodology, the process for 

disseminating the survey, instructions 

for completing the survey, the 

submission deadline, and the timeline 

for conducting any necessary follow-up, 

analyzing the responses, and developing 

a report. The Webinars must also serve 

as a vehicle for gathering input and 

feedback and answering questions. 

(b) Provide two TA Webinars that are 

recorded, archived, and made available 

to State VR agencies, providers of 

training, and relevant partners that 

detail the results and analyses of the 

survey of the current status of existing 

on-the-job training activities for 

individuals with disabilities in State VR 

agencies, as well as how State VR 

agencies might use this data to inform 

their job-driven activities. 

(c) Collect input and feedback on the 

draft compendium. The project must 

use a variety of vehicles, such as 

Webinars, teleconferences, online 

forums, and focus groups to engage 

State VR agencies, providers of training, 

and relevant partners in this process. 

(d) Provide two TA Webinars that are 

recorded, archived, and made available 

to State VR agencies, providers of 

training, and relevant partners that 

highlight promising practices, 

publications, examples, and resource 

materials contained in the compendium. 

(e) Provide two TA Webinars that are 

recorded, archived, and made available 

to State VR agencies, providers of 

training, and relevant partners and that 

feature real-world examples of 

successful on-the-job training activities 

for individuals with disabilities created 

through public-private partnerships and 

outcomes resulting from those activities. 

The Webinars also must include 

examples of how on-the-job training 

activities have supported employer 

efforts to hire individuals with 

disabilities. 

(f) Ensure that all products (i.e., 

survey results, compendium, TA 

Webinars) developed are widely 

disseminated to counselors and 

supervisors, Human Resource 

Development (HRD) specialists, 

community-based rehabilitation service 

providers, administrators, researchers, 

education and policy analysts, and other 

RSA job-driven projects, such as the 

JDVRTAC. To the extent possible, track 

the number and type of product 

recipients. 

(g) Ensure that all products are made 

available in accessible formats and 

submitted to the National Clearinghouse 

on Rehabilitation Training Materials 

(NCRTM). 

Coordination Activities 

(a) Establish and maintain an on-thejob training community of practice 

through the NCRTM as a vehicle for 

communication, exchange of 

information, and dissemination of 

products and as a forum for collecting 

promising practices in implementing, 

sustaining, and evaluating on-the-job 

training activities. 

(b) Obtain regular input and feedback 

from State VR agencies, providers of 

training, partners, such as the Council of 

State Administrators of Vocational 

Rehabilitation (CSAVR) and CSAVR’s 

National Employment Team (the NET), 

the National Council of State Agencies 

for the Blind (NCSAB), the JDVRTAC, 

and other relevant entities in the survey 

and literature review, as well as in the 

development and dissemination of the 

survey analysis and the compendium 

described in this priority. 

(c) Maintain ongoing communication 

with RSA. 

Application Requirements 

To be funded under this priority, 

applicants must meet the application 

requirements in this priority. RSA 

encourages innovative approaches to 

meet these requirements, which are: 

(a) Demonstrate in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Significance of the Proposed Project’’ 

how the proposed project will address 

State VR agencies’ capacity to develop 

on-the-job training activities for 

individuals with disabilities that reflect 

the current and future demands of the 

labor market. To meet this requirement, 

the applicant must: 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
30014 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

(1) Demonstrate knowledge of today’s 

labor market, including current and 

projected areas of job growth and 

knowledge, skills, and experiences that 

are needed in order to meet the needs 

and demands of business and industry; 

(2) Demonstrate knowledge of 

innovative or promising practices in 

building and maintaining effective onthe-job training activities, especially for 

individuals with disabilities; and 

(3) Demonstrate the extent to which 

the proposed project is likely to build 

the capacity of State VR agencies to 

provide, strengthen, and increase the 

number of on-the-job training activities 

for individuals with disabilities. 

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Quality of Project Services,’’ how the 

proposed project will achieve its goals, 

objectives, and intended outcomes. To 

meet this requirement, the applicant 

must: 

(1) Provide a detailed plan for how 

the proposed project will conduct the 

activities required in this priority. The 

plan must include a description of the 

design and methodology that will be 

used to survey State VR agencies in the 

first year, rationale to support the 

survey design and methodology, a 

strategy for disseminating the survey to 

all State VR agencies, a strategy to 

ensure a 75 percent survey response 

rate, and an approach for conducting 

follow-up with State VR agencies; 

(2) Demonstrate the extent to which 

the project activities reflect innovative 

and up-to-date approaches, methods, 

technologies, and effective practices; 

(3) Demonstrate how the literature 

review will identify and incorporate 

promising practices and examples of the 

use of on-the-job training gathered from 

the public workforce development 

system and from business and industry 

in creating, implementing, sustaining, 

and evaluating on-the-job training 

activities for individuals with 

disabilities; 

(4) Demonstrate how the project will 

collect Web analytics, including the 

number of registrants and their 

respective agencies or associations, and 

conduct a survey immediately following 

the Webinars to measure the quality, 

relevance, and usefulness of the 

training; and 

(5) Demonstrate the extent to which 

the project services are maximized 

through collaboration with the partners 

and stakeholders discussed in this 

priority. 

(c) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Adequacy of Project Resources,’’ how 

the proposed key project personnel, 

consultants, and subaward recipients 

have the qualifications and experience 

to perform the activities to provide State 

VR agencies with the tools and 

resources they need to increase the onthe-job training activities for individuals 

with disabilities. To meet this 

requirement, the applicant must 

demonstrate that: 

(1) The applicant and any key 

partners possess adequate resources to 

carry out the proposed activities; and 

(2) The proposed costs are reasonable 

in relation to the anticipated results and 

benefits. 

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Quality of the Management Plan,’’ how 

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— 

(1) Clearly defined roles and 

responsibilities for key project 

personnel, consultants, and subawards, 

as applicable; 

(2) Timelines and milestones for 

accomplishing the project tasks; 

(3) Key project personnel and any 

consultants, key partners, and subaward 

recipients that will be allocated to the 

project, their respective level of effort 

designated for the project, and how 

these allocations are appropriate and 

adequate to achieve the project’s 

intended outcomes, including an 

assurance that all personnel will 

communicate with stakeholders and 

RSA in a timely fashion; 

(4) How the proposed management 

plan will ensure that the knowledge 

development, TA, dissemination, and 

coordination activities and the 

developed products are of high quality; 

and 

(5) The diversity of perspectives, 

including those of counselors and 

supervisors, HRD specialists, 

community-based rehabilitation service 

providers, administrators, researchers, 

and education and policy analysts that 

the project will consider in its design 

making process. 

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. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

As part of its continuing effort to 

reduce paperwork and respondent 

burden, the Department conducts a 

preclearance consultation program to 

provide 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. 

This proposed priority contains 

information collection requirements that 

are approved by OMB under OMB 

control number 1820–0018; this 

proposed regulation does not affect the 

currently approved data collection. 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Secretary must determine whether this 

proposed regulatory action is 

‘‘significant’’ and, therefore, subject to 

the requirements of the Executive order 

and subject to review by the Office of 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Proposed Rules 30015 

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 

on a reasoned determination that their 

benefits justify their costs (recognizing 

that some benefits and costs are difficult 

to quantify); 

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the 

least burden on society, consistent with 

obtaining regulatory objectives and 

taking into account—among other things 

and to the extent practicable—the costs 

of cumulative regulations; 

(3) In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, select those 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety, 

and other advantages; distributive 

impacts; and equity); 

(4) To the extent feasible, specify 

performance objectives, rather than the 

behavior or manner of compliance a 

regulated entity must adopt; and 

(5) Identify and assess available 

alternatives to direct regulation, 

including economic incentives—such as 

user fees or marketable permits—to 

encourage the desired behavior, or 

provide information that enables the 

public to make choices. 

Executive Order 13563 also requires 

an agency ‘‘to use the best available 

techniques to quantify anticipated 

present and future benefits and costs as 

accurately as possible.’’ The Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB has emphasized that these 

techniques may include ‘‘identifying 

changing future compliance costs that 

might result from technological 

innovation or anticipated behavioral 

changes.’’ 

We are issuing this proposed priority 

only on a reasoned determination that 

its benefits would 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 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

We propose to fund through this 

priority TA to State VR agencies to 

improve the quality of VR services and 

ultimately the number and quality of 

their employment outcomes. This 

proposed 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 Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: May 18, 2015. 

Sue Swenson, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2015–12510 Filed 5–22–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0816; FRL–9928–23– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Delaware; Nonattainment New Source 

Review; Emission Offset Provisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to 

disapprove a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision submitted by the 

Delaware Department of Natural 

Resources and Environmental Control 

(DNREC) for the State of Delaware on 

October 15, 2013. EPA is proposing this 

action because the submittal does not 

satisfy the requirements of Clean Air 

Act (CAA) or the Federal implementing 

regulations, which establish the criteria 

under which the owner or operator of a 

new or modified major stationary source 

must obtain the required emission 

offsets ‘‘from the same source or other 

sources in the same nonattainment 

area’’ with limited exceptions, for 

Delaware’s nonattainment New Source 

Review (NSR) preconstruction 

permitting program. In addition, EPA is 

proposing disapproval of the SIP 

revision because Delaware exercises 

authorities that are reserved for EPA 

under section 107 of the CAA. This 

action is being taken under the CAA. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS