14582 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices 

EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: 

None. 

[FR Doc. 2010–6688 Filed 3–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Notice of Proposed Information 

Collection Requests 

AGENCY: Department of Education. 

SUMMARY: The Acting Director, 

Information Collection Clearance 

Division, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of 

Management, invites comments on the 

proposed information collection 

requests as required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before May 25, 

2010. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires 

that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) provide interested 

Federal agencies and the public an early 

opportunity to comment on information 

collection requests. OMB may amend or 

waive the requirement for public 

consultation to the extent that public 

participation in the approval process 

would defeat the purpose of the 

information collection, violate State or 

Federal law, or substantially interfere 

with any agency’s ability to perform its 

statutory obligations. The Acting 

Director, Information Collection 

Clearance Division, Regulatory 

Information Management Services, 

Office of Management, publishes that 

notice containing proposed information 

collection requests prior to submission 

of these requests to OMB. Each 

proposed information collection, 

grouped by office, contains the 

following: (1) Type of review requested, 

e.g., new, revision, extension, existing 

or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary 

of the collection; (4) Description of the 

need for, and proposed use of, the 

information; (5) Respondents and 

frequency of collection; and (6) 

Reporting and/or Recordkeeping 

burden. OMB invites public comment. 

The Department of Education is 

especially interested in public comment 

addressing the following issues: (1) Is 

this collection necessary to the proper 

functions of the Department; (2) will 

this information be processed and used 

in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate 

of burden accurate; (4) how might the 

Department enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (5) how might the 

Department minimize the burden of this 

collection on the respondents, including 

through the use of information 

technology. 

Dated: March 22, 2010. 

James Hyler, 

Acting Director, Information Collection 

Clearance Division, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of Management. 

Office of Elementary and Secondary 

Education 

Type of Review: New. 

Title: Striving Readers Comprehensive 

Literacy State Formula Grant 

Application. 

Frequency: Annually. 

Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal 

Gov’t. 

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour 

Burden: 

Responses: 52 

Burden Hours: 5,200 

Abstract: The Striving Readers 

Comprehensive Literacy program is 

authorized as part of the FY 2010 

Consolidated Appropriations Act (Pub. 

L. No. 111–117) under the Title I 

demonstration authority (Part E, Section 

1502 of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act (ESEA). The FY 2010 

Appropriations Act provides $250 

million under Section 1502 of the ESEA 

for a comprehensive literacy 

development and education program to 

advance literacy skills for students from 

birth through grade 12. The Act reserves 

$10 million for formula grants to assist 

States in creating or maintaining a State 

Literacy Team with expertise in literacy 

development and education for children 

from birth through grade 12 and to assist 

States in developing a comprehensive 

literacy plan. This request includes 

information collection activities covered 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA). The activities consist of: (1) A 

new application for an SEA to submit to 

the Department to apply for FY 2010 

funds under the 2010 Appropriations 

Act. 

Requests for copies of the proposed 

information collection request may be 

accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, 

by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending 

Collections’’ link and by clicking on link 

number 4262. When you access the 

information collection, click on 

‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view. 

Written requests for information should 

be addressed to U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537. 

Requests may also be electronically 

mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed 

to 202–401–0920. Please specify the 

complete title of the information 

collection when making your request. 

Comments regarding burden and/or 

the collection activity requirements 

should be electronically mailed to 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who 

use a telecommunications device for the 

deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1– 

800–877–8339. 

[FR Doc. 2010–6750 Filed 3–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services—Special 

Demonstration Programs—Model 

Demonstration Projects To Improve 

Outcomes for Individuals Receiving 

Social Security Disability Insurance 

(SSDI) Served by State Vocational 

Rehabilitation (VR) Agencies 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed priority. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

(CFDA) Number: 84.235L. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services proposes a priority under the 

Special Demonstration Programs to fund 

a project to identify, develop, and 

implement model demonstration 

projects to improve outcomes for 

individuals receiving Social Security 

Disability Insurance (SSDI) served by 

State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) 

agencies. The Assistant Secretary may 

use this priority for competitions in 

fiscal year (FY) 2010 and later years. We 

take this action to improve employment 

outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries 

receiving services from State VR 

agencies. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before April 26, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments about 

this notice to Thomas Finch, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue, SW., room 5147, Potomac 

Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 

20202–2800. 

If you prefer to send your comments 

by e-mail, use the following address: 

tom.finch@ed.gov. You must include the 

term ‘‘SSDI Demonstration’’ in the 

subject line of your electronic message. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Finch. Telephone: (202) 245– 

7343 or by e-mail: tom.finch@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), call the 

Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 

1–800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices 14583 

Invitation To Comment: We invite 

you to submit comments regarding this 

notice. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Order 12866 

and its 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 5052, Potomac 

Center Plaza (PCP), 550 12th Street, 

SW., 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 

this program is to expand and improve 

the provision of rehabilitation and other 

services authorized under the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended 

(the Rehabilitation Act), or to support 

activities that increase the provision, 

extent, availability, scope, and quality of 

rehabilitation services provided under 

the Rehabilitation Act. 

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 773(b). 

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 

CFR part 373. 

Proposed Priority 

This notice contains one proposed 

priority. 

Model Demonstration Projects To 

Improve Outcomes for Individuals 

Receiving Social Security Disability 

Insurance (SSDI) Served by State 

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) 

Agencies 

Background 

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as 

amended (the Rehabilitation Act), 

authorizes the establishment of VR 

agencies in each State to administer the 

State’s Vocational Rehabilitation 

Services program. These State VR 

agencies provide VR services to eligible 

individuals with disabilities to assist 

them to prepare for, obtain, or retain 

employment, preferably competitive 

employment. Under the VR program, 

competitive employment means 

employment in the competitive labor 

market that is performed in an 

integrated setting and for which the 

individual is paid at or above the 

minimum wage but not less than the 

customary wage and level of benefits 

paid by the employer for the same work 

to individuals who are not disabled (see 

generally 34 CFR 361.5(b)(11)). In this 

context, an integrated setting means 

employment in jobs that are typically 

found in the community and in which 

individuals with disabilities have the 

same opportunity to interact with others 

in the course of their work that is 

available to any other person employed 

in a comparable position (see generally 

34 CFR 361.5(b)(33)(ii)). 

The Social Security Administration 

(SSA) provides income support to more 

than 10 million working age people 

with disabilities through its Social 

Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and 

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) 

programs. Under the SSDI program, SSA 

provides benefits to eligible individuals 

with a work history who have paid 

Social Security taxes on their earnings 

and who cannot work because they have 

a medical condition that is expected to 

last at least one year or result in death. 

The SSI program is an income 

supplement program that provides cash 

assistance for basic needs, such as food, 

clothing, and shelter, to individuals 

who are 65 years of age or older or who 

are disabled and who have little or no 

income. Individuals with disabilities 

may receive assistance under both the 

SSDI and SSI programs. The Federal 

government’s cost of providing these 

benefits was almost $101 billion in 2005 

and the number of beneficiaries and cost 

of these programs are expected to 

increase (GAO–07–332, March 30, 

2007). 

State VR agencies serve a significant 

number of SSA beneficiaries. In FY 

2008, approximately 28 percent of all 

individuals whose service records were 

closed were SSA beneficiaries at the 

time that they applied for VR services, 

over half of whom were SSDI 

beneficiaries. Similarly, SSA 

beneficiaries represented nearly a 

quarter of those individuals exiting the 

State VR program with an employment 

outcome in FY 2008, over half of whom 

were SSDI beneficiaries (RSA–911 data). 

Accordingly, SSA has a significant and 

ongoing interest in State VR agencies’ 

success in helping individuals with 

disabilities secure employment. 

The Rehabilitation Act Amendments 

of 1992 increased the role of VR 

agencies in assisting SSA beneficiaries 

by requiring that individuals with 

disabilities who receive SSDI or SSI 

benefits be considered individuals with 

significant disabilities and be presumed 

to be eligible for VR services under the 

State VR Services program (see section 

102(a)(3) of the Rehabilitation Act). 

State VR agencies’ role has increased 

even more since the passage of the 

Ticket to Work and Work Incentives 

Improvement Act of 1998 (42 U.S.C. 

1320b–19). Under the Ticket to Work 

program, most SSDI beneficiaries and 

SSI recipients between the ages of 18 

and 64 are offered a ‘‘ticket’’ which they 

may use to obtain VR services, 

employment services, and other support 

services from an SSA employment 

network services provider. State VR 

agencies can participate in the Ticket to 

Work program as an employment 

network services provider or through a 

cost reimbursement program. As of 

March 1, 2010, about 229,224 ticketholders are working with a State VR 

agency under the traditional cost 

reimbursement arrangement. In 

addition, about 34 percent of the 40,328 

tickets that have been assigned have 

been assigned to State VR agencies as an 

employment network and about 66 

percent have been assigned to other 

employment networks. The Web site 

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/work/ 

tickettracker.html provides more details 

on the coordination effort between State 

VR agencies and the Ticket to Work 

program. There are also new 

opportunities for State VR agencies to 

partner with other VR providers under 

options that became available under the 

new Ticket to Work regulations that 

became effective July 21, 2008 (20 CFR 

part 411). 

Notwithstanding collaboration 

between SSA and the VR program, 

recent studies have criticized the return 

to work efforts for SSA beneficiaries. A 

GAO study found that while individuals 

increased their earnings after receiving 

VR services, only a small proportion of 

that group of individuals earned a 

sufficient amount that would enable 

them to leave the SSA beneficiary rolls 

(Vocational Rehabilitation: Earnings 

Increased for Many SSA Beneficiaries 

after Completing VR Services, but Few 

Earned Enough to Leave SSA’s 

Disability Rolls, GAO–07–332 March 30, 

2007). The most recent GAO study 

(Vocational Rehabilitation: Improved 

Information and Practices May Enhance 

State Agency Earnings Outcomes for 

SSA Beneficiaries, GAO–07–521, May 

23, 2007) reported that State agency 

outcomes for SSA beneficiaries 

completing VR programs varied widely 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
14584 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices 

1State VR agencies that serve individuals who are 

blind or visually impaired will be excluded from 

this study for two reasons: individuals who are 

blind or visually impaired have significantly 

different benefits under the SSDI program, the most 

important of which is the allowance of a higher 

level of earnings before meeting the SGA 

requirement; and most of these agencies serve 

relatively few individuals, making analysis more 

difficult. Likewise, VR programs in the 

Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern 

Marianas and the territories of Guam, American 

Samoa, and the Virgin Islands are excluded from 

this study for reasons of small numbers served, cost 

considerations, and significant differences in 

availability and organization of other resources for 

individuals with disabilities. 

across different outcome measures. For 

example, according to SSA earning 

records, there is wide variation among 

State VR agencies in the amount of 

money that individuals with disabilities 

who achieved employment outcomes 

earned during the first year after closure 

of the VR service record. 

This most recent study also found that 

some of the variance in outcomes could 

be explained by factors such as State 

economic conditions and the 

characteristics of the individuals 

receiving agency services. However, 

GAO did find that a few State VR 

agency practices appeared to yield 

positive earnings results and made the 

following recommendation: 

To improve the effectiveness of 

Education’s program evaluation efforts and 

ultimately the management of vocational 

rehabilitation programs, the Secretary of 

Education should further promote agency 

practices that show promise for helping more 

SSA disability beneficiaries participate in the 

work force. Such a model should seek to 

increase: (1) The percentage of VR staff who 

meet State standards and certifications 

established under the Comprehensive System 

of Personnel Development (CSPD), (2) 

partnership or involvement with area 

business communities, and (3) collaboration 

with other agencies that provide 

complementary services (Vocational 

Rehabilitation: Improved Information and 

Practices May Enhance State Agency 

Earnings Outcomes for SSA Beneficiaries, 

GAO–07–521, May 23, 2007). 

We propose to address GAO’s 

recommendation that the Department 

promote promising practices by 

examining practices in State VR 

agencies and other factors affecting the 

employment outcomes of SSDI 

beneficiaries. The focus of this proposed 

priority is limited to individuals with 

disabilities receiving SSDI benefits at 

the time of application to the VR 

program, including those individuals 

receiving both SSDI and SSI, because 

differences in program eligibility and 

other characteristics of the SSDI and SSI 

programs and their recipients (work 

history, amount of disability payment, 

work-related incentives/disincentives), 

would make it difficult to analyze, 

interpret, and generalize the results. 

There are a number of practices and 

other factors that may affect the 

outcomes of SSDI beneficiaries that 

need to be examined at the State or local 

level, for example, looking at the effect 

of partnering with business or 

collaborating with other agencies that 

provide complementary services, as 

suggested by GAO. Likewise, State VR 

agencies commit varying levels of 

resources towards rehabilitation of SSA 

beneficiaries, and these individual State 

decisions could also explain differences 

in State VR agency performance. 

Finally, the existence within States of 

different levels of extended services and 

supports available from other agencies 

to assist individuals with disabilities to 

maintain employment following the 

completion of the VR program and case 

closure may also have a direct impact 

on job retention and earnings levels. 

One way to study these individual 

State differences is to identify State VR 

agencies that are particularly successful 

in achieving employment outcomes for 

SSDI beneficiaries at comparatively 

higher wages and hours worked and to 

conduct in-depth case studies of those 

agencies to identify practices that are 

associated with more and better 

employment outcomes and can be 

replicated by other State VR agencies. 

One source of data that may be used 

for this analysis is the RSA–911. The 

RSA–911 is the primary individual 

service record level database on which 

State VR agencies report information 

about individual characteristics of, 

services provided to, and the 

employment outcomes obtained by 

individuals served by the VR program. 

Examination of RSA–911 information 

for FY 2008 shows that, as GAO 

reported, State VR agencies differ 

considerably in both the number of 

SSDI beneficiaries served and in the 

number and quality of the employment 

outcomes obtained by SSDI 

beneficiaries. There are differences in 

relative success rates (called 

employment outcome rates or 

rehabilitation rates in VR nomenclature) 

and relative differences in emphasis on 

full- or part-time work (as indicated by 

average hours worked per week). There 

are also differences in gross weekly 

wages and in the percentage of 

individuals who earn more than the 

substantial gainful activity (SGA) level 

at closure (RSA analysis of RSA–911 

data, FY 2008). 

A preliminary review of four 

performance measures (employment 

outcome rate, wages at case closure, 

hours worked, and percentage of 

individuals earning an amount greater 

than SGA at closure) in the RSA–911 

data indicates that there are 10 State VR 

agencies that score in the top 20 percent 

of all State VR agencies for at least three 

out of the four performance measures. 

Although a more in-depth analysis of 

recent RSA–911 data and other 

information may provide somewhat 

different results, RSA has concluded 

from this preliminary review that there 

is a pool of State VR agencies that are 

able to achieve more employment 

outcomes involving full-time work and 

higher wages for SSDI beneficiaries from 

which selections for a case study review 

could be made. 

This proposed priority is envisioned 

as a cooperative agreement with 

significant interaction and collaboration 

between RSA and the grantee. There are 

several distinct activities involved in 

this research activity. These include: 

further analysis of existing RSA data 

and other relevant data to identify highperforming State VR agencies; 

investigation of practices within these 

agencies using rigorous case study 

methodology; analysis of the case study 

findings; and design, implementation, 

and evaluation of a demonstration 

project based on the findings from the 

case studies. 

Some of the preliminary work for this 

data analysis has been completed, as 

discussed previously in this notice. 

Before a grant is made under this 

priority, RSA staff will conduct a more 

thorough analysis of State VR agency 

performance related to serving SSDI 

beneficiaries to determine whether there 

are State VR agencies that consistently 

appear to perform better than others 

across multiple measures. In conducting 

this analysis, RSA will likely use other 

databases in conjunction with the RSA– 

911. The analysis will refine the criteria 

for measuring high performance and 

will be the basis for identifying States 

that meet the identified criteria. RSA 

will share the results of this analysis 

with the grantee during the discussion 

of the selection of the high-performing 

State VR agencies to be examined 

further through the case studies.1 It is 

recommended that applicants assume 

that there will be three case studies on 

the premise that further analysis will 

reduce the pool of State VR agencies 

that show consistent positive outcomes 

for SSDI beneficiaries and that only 

some of those State VR agencies will 

agree to participate in the study. 

The purpose of the case studies of 

State VR agencies that demonstrate 

sustained success with SSDI 

beneficiaries is to determine possible 

factors contributing to that success. 

High-performing agencies will be asked 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices 14585 

by RSA to participate in these in-depth 

case studies to determine factors or 

variables that are related to high 

performance as defined for this project. 

The factors or variables may be 

decisions or activities that are under the 

control of the State VR agency, or they 

may be characteristics of the external 

State environment. Information from the 

case study analysis will be used in the 

design of an intervention model by the 

successful grantee that will serve as the 

basis for the demonstration projects to 

be carried out and evaluated by the 

grantee under this priority. 

Proposed Priority 

The Assistant Secretary for Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services 

proposes a priority under the Special 

Demonstration Programs to fund a 

project to identify, develop, and 

implement model demonstration 

projects to improve outcomes for 

individuals receiving Social Security 

Disability Insurance (SSDI) who are 

served by State vocational rehabilitation 

(VR) agencies. Under this priority, the 

project must be designed to contribute 

to the following outcomes: 

• Identify through in-depth case 

study of selected State VR agencies 

factors that account for the relatively 

better qualitative and quantitative 

results of these agencies in achieving 

employment outcomes at or above 

substantial gainful activity (SGA) for 

SSDI beneficiaries. 

• Determine whether there are a 

sufficient number of factors related to 

the better employment outcome results 

that are within the control of the State 

VR agency, and if so, develop an 

intervention model incorporating those 

factors that can be replicated in other 

State VR agencies and that can be 

evaluated in terms of the model’s 

impact after implementation. 

• Implement and evaluate the 

intervention model in at least three 

State VR agencies, selected by the 

Rehabilitation Services Administration 

(RSA) based on information provided by 

the grantee, that are willing to 

implement the model. One criterion for 

selecting these State VR agencies is that 

SSDI beneficiaries whom they serve 

have an employment outcome rate at or 

below the rate for other State VR 

agencies. 

• If the model demonstration projects 

show an improved employment rate for 

SSDI beneficiaries, complete the 

development of the intervention model 

incorporating information acquired 

through the model demonstration 

projects, recommend any strategies 

needed for implementation of the model 

by other State VR agencies, and 

disseminate the findings of this 

demonstration project to State VR 

agencies. 

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 Order 12866: This notice 

has been reviewed in accordance with 

Executive Order 12866. Under the terms 

of the order, we have assessed the 

potential costs and benefits of this 

proposed regulatory action. 

The potential costs associated with 

this proposed regulatory action are 

those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering this program effectively 

and efficiently. 

In assessing the potential costs and 

benefits—both quantitative and 

qualitative—of this proposed regulatory 

action, we have determined that the 

benefits of the proposed priority justify 

the costs. 

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 computer diskette) 

by contacting the Grants and Contracts 

Services Team, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC 

20202–2550. Telephone: (202) 245– 

7363. If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll 

free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

You can view this document, as well as 

all other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in the 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF) on the Internet at the 

following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/ 

fedregister. To use PDF you must have 

the Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at this site. 

Note: 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 on GPO 

Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/ 

index.html. 

Dated: March 23, 2010. 

Alexa Posny, 

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2010–6787 Filed 3–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

National Institute on Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR)— 

Disability and Rehabilitation Research 

Projects and Centers Program— 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Centers (RRTCs)—Employment 

Outcomes for Individuals Who Are 

Blind or Visually Impaired 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed priority. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

(CFDA) Number: 84.133B–6. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES