```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 111 (Tuesday, June 10, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33092-33094]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13498]

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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Chapter III

[Docket ID: ED-2014-OSERS-0013]

Final Priority. National Institute on Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research--Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers

[CFDA Number: 84.133B-4.]

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

ACTION: Final priority.

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

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 
Rehabilitative Services announces a priority for the Rehabilitation 
Research and Training Center (RRTC) Program administered by the 
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). 
Specifically, we announce a priority for an RRTC on Health and Function 
of Individuals with Physical Disabilities. The Assistant Secretary may 
use this priority for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014 and later 
years. We take this action to focus research attention on an area of 
national need. We intend the priority to contribute to improved 
outcomes of health and function of individuals with physical 
disabilities.

DATES: This priority is effective July 10, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Barrett, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5142, Potomac Center Plaza 
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2700. Telephone: (202) 245-6211 or by 
email: patricia.barrett@ed.gov.
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of Program: The purpose of the 
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program is 
to plan and conduct research, demonstration projects, training, and 
related activities, including international activities, to develop 
methods, procedures, and rehabilitation technology that maximize the 
full inclusion and integration into society, employment, independent 
living, family support, and economic and social self-sufficiency of 
individuals with disabilities, especially individuals with the most 
severe disabilities, and to improve the effectiveness of services 
authorized under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended 
(Rehabilitation Act).

Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers

    The purpose of the RRTCs, which are funded through the Disability 
and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program, is to achieve 
the goals of, and improve the effectiveness of, services authorized 
under the Rehabilitation Act through well-designed research, training, 
technical assistance, and dissemination activities in important topical 
areas. These activities are designed to benefit rehabilitation service 
providers, individuals with disabilities, family members, policymakers, 
and other research stakeholders. Additional information on the RRTC 
program can be found at: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/rrtc/index.html.

    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(2).

    Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.
    We published a notice of proposed priority (NPP) for this program 
in the Federal Register on March 3, 2014 (79 FR 11738). That notice 
contained background information and our reasons for proposing the 
particular priority.
    There are no differences between the proposed priority and this 
final priority.
    Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the notice of 
proposed priority, six parties submitted comments on the proposed 
priority.
    Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes, or 
suggested changes the law does not authorize us to make under the 
applicable statutory authority. In addition, we do not address general 
comments that raised concerns not directly related to the proposed 
priority.
    Analysis of Comments and Changes: An analysis of the comments and 
of any changes in the priority since publication of the NPP follows.
    Comment: One commenter questioned the need for this priority.
    Discussion: This priority, creating an RRTC on Health and Function 
of Individuals with Physical Disabilities, would help achieve the goals 
of, and improve the effectiveness of services authorized under, the 
Rehabilitation Act. By creating an RRTC on Health and Function for 
Individuals with Physical Disabilities, we are fulfilling the purposes 
established in NIDRR's Long-Range Plan for Fiscal Years 2013-2017 
(Plan), which was published in the Federal Register on April 4, 2013 
(78 FR 20299). More specifically, as we discuss in the NPP, there is a 
need to better understand how specific health problems are interrelated 
with optimal health and function; how they may affect community 
participation, work productivity, and quality of life; and how they may 
be prevented or mitigated. We believe this priority will focus research 
attention on this area of national need.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the RRTC should focus on 
technology-based interventions to improve health and function outcomes 
of individuals with disabilities.
    Discussion: NIDRR agrees that technology can be used to improve the 
health and function outcomes of individuals with physical disabilities. 
This is one of five broad areas described in the priority, under which 
applicants can propose research and related activities. NIDRR does not 
wish to limit applicants' ability to address the other areas in the 
priority by requiring a focus

[[Page 33093]]

on technology, as recommended by the commenter. The peer review process 
will determine the merits of each proposal.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter noted that several research centers working 
in the area of health and function for individuals with physical 
disabilities have focused their efforts on analysis of existing data. 
The commenter recommended that NIDRR revise the priority to require the 
RRTC to collect new data in order to advance the field.
    Discussion: Nothing in the priority precludes an applicant from 
proposing to engage in the collection and analysis of new data. 
However, NIDRR does not wish to revise the research requirements in the 
way suggested by the commenter because we believe the revisions would 
limit the number and breadth of applications submitted under this 
priority. The peer review process will determine the merits of each 
proposal.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that NIDRR revise the priority 
to require the RRTC to focus on at least two study populations or 
diagnostic groups, thereby promoting the generalizability of the RRTC's 
findings.
    Discussion: Paragraph (a) of the proposed priority states that the 
RRTC can focus on individuals with physical disabilities as a group or 
on specific disability or demographic subpopulations of individuals 
with physical disabilities. NIDRR purposely does not require a minimum 
number of target populations because we do not want to limit the 
breadth and number of applications that can be submitted under this 
priority.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter asked NIDRR to further define and specify 
the limits of the term ``physical disability.'' The commenter noted 
that people with traumatic brain injury (TBI) or stroke, for example, 
have acquired cognitive or intellectual impairments, as well as 
physical impairments, and often receive clinical services from 
rehabilitation professionals with expertise in physical disabilities. 
The commenter requested clarification of the term ``physical 
disability'' to help applicants determine whether their proposed target 
population(s) are an appropriate fit within the priority.
    Discussion: We agree that some individuals with disabling 
conditions such as TBI or stroke could be considered in multiple target 
populations, including individuals with physical disabilities. NIDRR 
purposely outlines broad categories of target populations in its Plan 
and its priorities to allow applicants the flexibility to choose the 
disability category that is most relevant to their research questions 
and purposes. With this priority, we allow applicants to define and 
justify their target population within the broad category of 
individuals with physical disabilities. The peer review process will 
determine the merits of each proposal.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter noted that paragraph (c)(ii) of the priority 
requires the RRTC to provide training to rehabilitation providers and 
other disability service providers in order to facilitate more 
effective delivery of services. The commenter suggested that by 
limiting the recipients of the required training to service providers, 
NIDRR may be limiting the knowledge that is available to consumers and 
reinforcing the knowledge barrier between service providers and 
consumers. The commenter suggested that NIDRR modify paragraph (c)(ii) 
to require the RRTCs to provide training to consumers and service 
providers.
    Discussion: The requirements in paragraph (c)(ii) are based 
directly on the Federal regulations that govern administration of the 
RRTC program. The regulations in 34 CFR 350.22(b)(1) require that 
training be provided to rehabilitation personnel or rehabilitation 
research personnel. At the same time, nothing in the regulations or in 
the priority precludes applicants from proposing to provide training to 
individuals with disabilities in addition to rehabilitation or 
rehabilitation research providers (who may also have disabilities). It 
is up to the applicant to designate and justify training targets. The 
peer review process will determine the merits of each proposal.
    Changes: None.

Final Priority

    The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services establishes a priority for an RRTC on Health and Function of 
Individuals with Physical Disabilities.
    The RRTC must contribute to maximizing the health and function 
outcomes of individuals with physical disabilities by:
    (a) Conducting research activities in one or more of the following 
priority areas, focusing on individuals with physical disabilities as a 
group or on individuals in specific disability or demographic 
subpopulations of individuals with physical disabilities:
    (i) Technology to improve health and function outcomes for 
individuals with physical disabilities.
    (ii) Individual and environmental factors associated with improved 
access to rehabilitation and health care and improved health and 
function outcomes for individuals with physical disabilities.
    (iii) Interventions that contribute to improved health and function 
outcomes for individuals with physical disabilities. Interventions 
include any strategy, practice, program, policy, or tool that, when 
implemented as intended, contributes to improvements in outcomes for 
the specified population.
    (iv) Effects of government practices, policies, and programs on 
health care access and on health and function outcomes for individuals 
with physical disabilities.
    (v) Practices and policies that contribute to improved health and 
function outcomes for individuals with physical disabilities.
    (b) Focusing its research on one or more specific stages of 
research. If the RRTC is to conduct research that can be categorized 
under more than one of the research stages, or research that progresses 
from one stage to another, those stages must be clearly specified. The 
research stages and their definitions are in the final priorities and 
definitions published in the Federal Register on May 7, 2013 (78 FR 
26513).
    (c) Serving as a national resource center related to health and 
function for individuals with physical disabilities, their families, 
and other stakeholders by conducting knowledge translation activities 
that include, but are not limited to:
    (i) Providing information and technical assistance to service 
providers, individuals with physical disabilities and their 
representatives, and other key stakeholders.
    (ii) Providing training, including graduate, pre-service, and in-
service training, to rehabilitation providers and other disability 
service providers, to facilitate more effective delivery of services to 
individuals with physical disabilities. This training may be provided 
through conferences, workshops, public education programs, in-service 
training programs, and similar activities.
    (iii) Disseminating research-based information and materials 
related to health and function for individuals with physical 
disabilities.
    (iv) Involving key stakeholder groups in the activities conducted 
under paragraph (a) in order to maximize the relevance and usability of 
the new knowledge generated by the RRTC.

[[Page 33094]]

Types of Priorities

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

    Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in 
which we choose to use this priority, we invite applications through 
a notice in the Federal Register.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether 
this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to 
the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely 
to result in a rule that may--
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, 
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or 
tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to 
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
    (2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the 
Executive order.
    This final regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action 
subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
    We have also reviewed this final regulatory action under Executive 
Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, 
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in 
Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 
13563 requires that an agency--
    (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination 
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits 
and costs are difficult to quantify);
    (2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into 
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of 
cumulative regulations;
    (3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select 
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential 
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
    (4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather 
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must 
adopt; and
    (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or 
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide 
information that enables the public to make choices.
    Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these 
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs 
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated 
behavioral changes.''
    We are issuing this final priority only on a reasoned determination 
that its benefits justify its costs. In choosing among alternative 
regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that maximize net 
benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes 
that this regulatory action is consistent with the principles in 
Executive Order 13563.
    We also have determined that this regulatory action does not unduly 
interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the exercise of 
their governmental functions.
    In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has 
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and 
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those 
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as 
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
    The benefits of the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects 
and Centers Program have been well established over the years, as 
projects similar to the one envisioned by the final priority have been 
completed successfully. The new RRTC will generate and promote the use 
of new knowledge that is intended to the health and function of 
individuals with disabilities.
    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this 
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, 
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person 
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this 
document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free 
Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the 
Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System 
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well 
as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal 
Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF 
you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the 
site.
    You may also access documents of the Department published in the 
Federal Register by using the article search feature at: 
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search 
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published 
by the Department.

    Dated: June 5, 2013.
Michael K. Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services.
[FR Doc. 2014-13498 Filed 6-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
```