```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 3, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20069-20073]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07763]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Chapter III

Proposed Priority--National Institute on Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR)--Rehabilitation Engineering Research 
Centers (RERCs)--Technologies To Support Successful Aging With 
Disability

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

ACTION: Proposed priority.

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

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.133E-3

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 
Rehabilitative Services proposes one priority for the Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by 
NIDRR. Specifically, this notice proposes one priority for an RERC: 
Technologies to Support Successful Aging with Disability. The Assistant 
Secretary may use this priority for a competition in fiscal year (FY) 
2013 and later years. We take this action to focus research attention 
on areas of national need. We intend to use this priority to improve 
rehabilitation services and outcomes for individuals with disabilities.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before May 3, 2013.

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

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  This notice of proposed priority is in 
concert with NIDRR's currently approved Long-Range Plan (Plan). The 
Plan, which was published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2006 
(71 FR 8166), can be accessed on the Internet at the following site: 
www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/nidrr/policy.html.
    Through the implementation of the Plan, NIDRR seeks to: (1) Improve 
the quality and utility of disability and rehabilitation research; (2) 
foster an exchange of expertise, information, and training methods to 
facilitate the advancement of knowledge and understanding of the unique 
needs of traditionally underserved populations; (3) determine best 
strategies and programs to improve rehabilitation outcomes for 
underserved populations; (4) identify research gaps; (5) identify 
mechanisms for integrating research and practice; and (6) disseminate 
findings.
    This notice proposes one priority that NIDRR intends to use for 
RERC competitions in FY 2013 and possibly later years. However, nothing 
precludes NIDRR from publishing additional priorities, if needed. 
Furthermore, NIDRR is under no obligation to make awards for this 
priority. The decision to make an award will be based on the quality of 
applications received and available funding.
    Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding 
this notice. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in 
developing the

[[Page 20070]]

notice of final priority, we urge you to identify clearly the specific 
topic that each comment addresses.
    We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Order 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 this notice in room 5133, 550 12th Street SW., PCP, 
Washington, DC, 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.
    Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the 
Rulemaking Record: On request we will provide an appropriate 
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who 
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the 
public rulemaking record for this notice. If you want to schedule an 
appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please 
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program is to plan and 
conduct research, demonstration projects, training, and related 
activities, including international activities, to develop methods, 
procedures, and rehabilitation technology that maximize the full 
inclusion and integration into society, employment, independent living, 
family support, and economic and social self-sufficiency of individuals 
with disabilities, especially individuals with the most severe 
disabilities, and to improve the effectiveness of services authorized 
under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation Act).

Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Program (RERCs)

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

    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(3).
    Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.

Proposed Priority

    This notice contains one proposed priority.

RERC on Technologies To Support Successful Aging With Disability

Background

    Current estimates indicate that between 37 million and 52 million 
individuals living in the United States have some kind of disability 
(IOM, 2007a; Brault, 2012). These numbers will likely grow 
significantly in the next 25-30 years as the baby boom generation 
continues to enter later life, when the risk of disability is the 
highest (IOM, 2007a). Projections based on the U.S. Census data from 
2010 indicate that by 2030, the population 65 years and older will 
almost double from 35 million to more than 71 million or to 
approximately 20 percent of the overall population (Brault, 2012).
    Although older age is a major risk factor for disability, millions 
of younger and middle-age adults also live with disabilities. In 2010, 
some 29.5 million Americans aged 21 to 64 or 16.6 percent of the 
working-age population reported disabilities (Brault, 2012). This large 
working-age group includes people who are aging with life-long and 
early onset disabilities that were once fatal or associated with 
shortened life expectancy (Jensen et al., 2011; IOM, 2007b, Kemp & 
Mosqueda, 2004). This population is now experiencing the benefits of 
increased longevity as well as premature or atypical aging related to 
their condition, its management, or other environmental factors (Jensen 
et al., 2011; IOM, 2007; Kailes, 2006; Kemp & Mosqueda, 2004).
    As working-age and older adults with disabilities grow older, many 
face significant new challenges to their health and independence due to 
the onset of secondary conditions associated with changes in the 
underlying impairment and the onset of age-related, chronic conditions 
(Freid et al., 2012; Jensen et al., 2011; IOM, 2007b; Kailes, 2006; 
Kemp & Mosqueda, 2004; Kinny et al., 2004). The challenges of aging 
with and into disability are compounded by the presence of economic and 
environmental barriers, such as a lack of affordable and accessible 
transportation and housing services. There is a lack of innovative 
technologies that extend the benefits of health promotion and 
rehabilitation interventions and strategies into home and community-
based settings (Rizzo et al., 2012; Czaja & Sharit, 2009; IOM, 2007a; 
IOM, 2007c; Mann, 2005).
    For example, while emerging research indicates that functional 
motor capacity and independence can be improved, maintained, or 
recovered via consistent participation in exercise and rehabilitation 
programs for individuals with upper and lower extremity impairments 
(Winstein et al., 2012; Czaja & Sharit, 2009; Merians, et al. 2009; 
Krakauer, 2006; Mann, 2005; Mynatt & Rodgers, 2002), the availability 
of evidence-based exercise and rehabilitation programs and 
interventions in home and community-based settings for this population 
is severely limited (Lindenberger et al, 2008; Krakauer, 2006; Tyrer et 
al., 2006). The commercially available, home-based technologies that 
promise to improve balance and prevent falls are not informed by 
evidence from rehabilitation science and gerontology and have not been 
evaluated for use by individuals with disabilities (Rizzo et al., 2011; 
Czaja & Sharit, 2009; Lindenberger et al., 2008).
    Despite limitations in the availability of evidence-based 
technologies and interventions to support healthy aging with 
disability, findings from social and demographic research suggests that 
assistive technologies (AT) and information and communication 
technologies (ICT) are playing an increasingly important role in the 
lives of people with disabilities (Wild et al., 2008; Freedman et al., 
2006). For example, secondary analysis of data from the National Long-
Term Care Survey found that the steadily increasing use of these 
technologies was associated with downward trends in the reported rates 
of disability among adults age 65 and over (Spillman, 2004). Other 
research suggests that AT and ICT may substitute for, or supplement, 
personal care (Carlson and Ehrlich, 2005).
    Findings such as these suggest that greater availability and use of 
low-cost, evidence-based, computer-aided

[[Page 20071]]

technologies, such as AT and ICT, could help the Nation prepare for a 
future characterized by a growing population of working-age and older 
adults with long-term disabilities and increased demand for healthcare 
and long-term services and supports, combined with a shrinking 
proportion of younger people available to provide personal assistance 
(Lindenberger, 2008; IOM, 2007a, Pew & Van Hemel, 2004). To respond to 
the challenges and opportunities in the emerging area of aging, 
disability and technology, NIDRR proposes to fund a Rehabilitation 
Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Technologies to Support Healthy 
Aging With Disability.

References

Brault, M.W. (2012). Americans with disabilities: 2010. U.S. Census 
Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. Available at www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-131.pdf.
Carlson D., & Ehrlich N. (2005). Assistive technology and 
information technology use and need by persons with disabilities in 
the United States, 2001. Washington, DC: National Institute on 
disability and Rehabilitation Research, U.S. Department of 
Education. Available at http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/reserach/pubs/at-use/at-use-2001.doc.
Czaja, S.J., & Sharit, J. (2009). The aging of the population: 
Opportunities and challenges for human factors engineering. The 
Bridge: Linking Engineering and Society, 39(1): 34-40. Available at 
www.nae.edu/Publications/Bridge/TechnologiesforanAgingPopulation/TheAgingofthePopulation.aspx.
Freedman, V.A., Agree, E.M., Martin, L.G., & Cornman, J.C. (2006). 
Trends in the use of assistive technology and personal care for 
late-life disability, 1992-2000. Gerontologist, 46(1): 124-127.
Freid, V.M., Bernstein, A.B., & Bush, M.A. (2012). Multiple chronic 
conditions among adults aged 45 and over: Trends Over the past 10 
years. NCHS data brief, no. 100. Hyattsville, MD: National Center 
for Health Statistics. 2010. Available at www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db100.htm.
Institute of Medicine (IOM). 2007a. The future of disability in 
America. Committee on Disability in America; Field, M.J., Jette, 
A.M., editors. Chapter 1: Introduction, pp. 16-34. Washington (DC): 
The National Academies Press. Available at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11434.
Institute of Medicine (IOM). 2007b. The future of disability in 
America. Committee on Disability in America; Field, M.J., Jette, 
A.M., editors. Chapter 5: Secondary conditions and aging with 
disability, pp. 136-161. Washington (DC): The National Academies 
Press. Available at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11434.
Institute of Medicine (IOM). 2007c. The future of disability in 
America. Committee on Disability in America; Field, M.J., Jette, 
A.M., editors. Chapter 7: Assistive and mainstream technologies for 
people with disabilities, pp. 183-221. Washington (DC): The National 
Academies Press. Available at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11434.
Jensen, M.P., Molton, I.R., Groah, S.L., Campbell, M.L., Charlifue, 
S., Chiodo, A., Forchheimer, M., Krause, J.S., & Tate D. (2011). 
Secondary health conditions in individuals aging with SCI: 
Terminology, concepts, and analytic approaches. Spinal Cord, 50(5): 
373-378.
Kailes, J.L. (2006). A User's Perspective on Midlife (Ages 18-65) 
Aging with Disability. Workshop on Disability in America: A New 
Look. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, pp. 194-204.
Kemp, B.J., & Mosqueda, L. (Eds.) (2004). Aging with a disability: 
What the clinician needs to know. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins 
University Press.
Kinny, S., Patrick, D.L., & Doyle D.L. (2004). Prevalence of 
secondary conditions among people with disabilities. American 
Journal of Public Health, 94(3): 443-445.
Krakauer, J.W. (2006). Motor learning: Its relevance to stroke 
recovery and neurorehabilitation. Current Opinion in Neurology, 19: 
84.
Lindenberger, U., Lovden, M., Schellenbach, M., Li, S., & Kruger, A. 
(2008). Psychological principles of successful aging technologies; a 
mini-review. Gerontology, 54: 59-68.
Mann, W.C. (2005). Aging, Disability, and Independence: Trends and 
Perspectives. Smart Technology for Aging, Disability, and 
Independence: The State of the Science. Hoboken, NJ. John Wiley & 
Sons, Inc., pp. 1-29.
Merians, A.S, Tunik, E., Fluet, G.G., Qiu, Q., & Adamovich, S.V. 
(2009). Innovative approaches to the rehabilitation of upper 
extremity hemiparesis using virtual environments. European Journal 
of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 45: 123.
Mynatt, E., & Rodgers, W. (2002). Developing technology to support 
the functional independence of older adults. Ageing International, 
27: 24.
Pew, R.W., & Van Hemel, S.B. (2004). National Research Council 
(U.S.) Steering Committee for the Workshop on Technology for 
Adaptive Aging, et al. Technology for adaptive aging. Washington, 
DC; National Academies Press.
Rizzo, A., Requejo, P., Winstein, C., Lange, B., Ragusa, G., 
Merians, A., Patton J., Banerjee, P., & Aisen, A. (2011). Virtual 
reality applications for addressing the needs of those aging with 
disability. In Medicine Meets Virtual Reality 18, J.D. Westwood et 
al. (Eds.) IOS Press, 2011 Available at www.isi.edu/research/rerc/spotlight/files/NIDRR_MMVR2011_workshop_book.pdf.
Spillman, B.C. (2004). Changes in elderly disability rates and the 
implications for health care utilization and cost. Milbank 
Quarterly, 82(1): 157-194.
Tyrer, H.W., Alwan, M., Demiris, G., He, Z., Keller, J., Skubic, M., 
& Rantz, M. (2006). Technology for successful aging. Proceedings of 
the 28th institute of electrical and electronics engineers (IEEE) 
Engineering in medicine and biology society (EMBS) annual 
international conference, New York City, USA; pp. 3290-3293. 
Available at http://eldertech.missouri.edu/files/Technology_for_Successful_Aging.pdf.
Wild, K., Boise. L., Lundell, J., & Foucek A. (2008). Unobtrusive 
in-home monitoring of cognitive and physical health: Reactions and 
perceptions of older adults. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 27(2): 
181-200. Available at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2629437/?tool=pubmed.
Winstein, C.J., Requejo, P.S., Zelinski, E.M., Mulroy, S.J., & 
Crimmins, E.M. (2012). A transformative subfield in rehabilitation 
science at the nexus of new technologies, aging, and disability. 
Frontiers in Psychology, 3 (Article 340): 1-8. Available at 
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3448347/.

Proposed Priority

    The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services proposes the following priority for the establishment of a 
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Technologies to 
Support Successful Aging With Disability. Within its designated 
priority research area, this RERC will focus on innovative 
technological solutions, new knowledge, and new concepts that will 
improve the lives of individuals with disabilities.
    Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop or identify, 
and evaluate innovative technologies and strategies that maximize the 
physical and cognitive functioning of individuals with long-term 
disabilities as they age. This RERC must engage in research and 
development activities to build a base of evidence for the usability 
of, and cost-effectiveness of home-based interactive technologies that 
are intended to improve physical and cognitive functioning of 
individuals with disabilities as they age. This RERC may develop and 
evaluate new technologies, or identify and evaluate existing or 
commercially available technologies, or both, that are designed to 
improve the physical and cognitive outcomes of this population. In 
addition, the RERC must facilitate access to, and use of the low-cost, 
home-based interactive technologies that improve the physical and 
cognitive outcomes of individuals with disabilities, through such means 
as collaborating and communicating with relevant stakeholders, 
providing technical assistance, and promoting technology transfer.

General RERC Requirements

    Under this priority, the RERC must be designed to contribute to the 
following outcomes:
    (1) Increased technical and scientific knowledge relevant to its 
designated priority research area. The RERC must

[[Page 20072]]

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

Types of Priorities

    When inviting applications for a competition using one or more 
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute, 
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal 
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
    Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only 
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
    Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference 
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1) 
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the 
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) 
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of 
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
    Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are 
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority. 
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a 
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).

Final 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

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 regulatory action under Executive Order 
13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, 
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review

[[Page 20073]]

established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, 
Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency--
    (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination 
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits 
and costs are difficult to quantify);
    (2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into 
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of 
cumulative regulations;
    (3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select 
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential 
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
    (4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather 
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must 
adopt; and
    (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or 
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide 
information that enables the public to make choices.
    Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these 
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs 
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated 
behavioral changes.''
    We are issuing this proposed priority only upon 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 of this regulatory action. 
The potential costs are those resulting from statutory requirements and 
those we have determined as necessary for administering the 
Department's programs and activities.
    The benefits of the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects 
and Centers Programs have been well established over the years in that 
similar projects have been completed successfully. This proposed 
priority would generate new knowledge through research and development. 
The new RERCs would generate, disseminate, and promote the use of new 
information that would improve the options for individuals with 
disabilities to fully participate in their communities.
    Intergovernmental Review: This program is not subject to Executive 
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this 
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, 
audiotape, or compact disc) 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: March 29, 2013.
Michael Yudin,
Delegated the authority to perform the functions and duties of 
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2013-07763 Filed 4-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
```