Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 28563 

General information and press 

inquiries: Mr. Frank Meilinger, OSHA 

Office of Communications; telephone: 

(202) 693–1999; email: 

Meilinger.Francis2@dol.gov. 

Technical inquiries: Mr. Vernon 

Preston, Directorate of Construction; 

telephone: (202) 693–2020; fax: (202) 

693–1689; email: preston.vernon@

dol.gov. 

Copies of this Federal Register notice 

and news releases: Electronic copies of 

these documents are available at 

OSHA’s web page at http://

www.osha.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Extension of the Comment Period 

On May 21, 2018, OSHA published a 

NPRM titled ‘‘Cranes and Derricks in 

Construction: Operator Qualification’’ 

(83 FR 23534). In the NPRM, OSHA 

proposed to amend 29 CFR part 1926, 

subpart CC, to revise sections that 

address crane operator training, 

certification/licensing, and competency. 

The purpose of these amendments are 

to: require comprehensive training of 

operators; remove certification by 

capacity from certification 

requirements; clarify and permanently 

extend the employer duty to evaluate 

potential operators for their ability to 

safely operate equipment covered by 

subpart CC; and require documentation 

of that evaluation. 

The public comment period for this 

NPRM was to conclude on June 20, 

2018, 30 days after publication of the 

NPRM. However, OSHA received 

requests from stakeholders for an 

extension of the public comment period 

(OSHA–2007–0066–0683 and –0693). 

These requests state that, given the 

complexity and significance of this 

NPRM, more time for submitting 

comments was necessary to gather 

information from members of the 

organizations and develop meaningful 

comments. 

OSHA agrees to an extension and 

believes that a 15 day extension of the 

public comment period is a sufficient 

amount of time to address these 

concerns in light of the short period of 

time remaining before the deadline for 

crane operator certification. Therefore, 

the public comment period will now 

conclude July 5, 2018. Comments can be 

submitted by following the procedures 

listed under ADDRESSES section of this 

notice. 

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1926 

Certification, Construction industry, 

Cranes, Derricks, Occupational safety 

and health, Qualification, Safety, 

Training. 

Signed at Washington, DC, on June 15, 

2018. 

Loren Sweatt, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for 

Occupational Safety and Health. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13280 Filed 6–15–18; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

31 CFR Part 34 

RIN 1505–AC55 

Regulations for the Gulf Coast 

Restoration Trust Fund 

AGENCY: Office of the Fiscal Assistant 

Secretary, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the 

Treasury (Treasury) proposes to amend 

its rules to revise the method by which 

the statutory three percent limitation on 

administrative costs (referred to 

throughout this notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) as the ‘‘three 

percent administrative cost cap’’) is 

applied under the Direct Component, 

Comprehensive Plan Component, and 

Spill Impact Component under the 

Resources and Ecosystem Sustainability, 

Tourist Opportunities, and Revived 

Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act 

of 2012 (RESTORE Act or Act). This 

proposed amendment will help ensure 

that the Gulf Coast states and localities 

have the necessary funding to efficiently 

and effectively oversee and manage 

projects and programs for ecological and 

economic restoration of the Gulf Coast 

Region while ensuring compliance with 

the statutory three percent 

administrative cost cap. It does not 

change the definition of ‘‘administrative 

costs’’ or the indirect cost 

reimbursement calculation on an 

individual federal grant using the 

negotiated indirect cost rate agreement 

(NICRA) or de minimis rate. 

DATES: Written comments on this NPRM 

must be received on or before: July 20, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: Treasury invites comments 

on the topic addressed in this NPRM. 

Comments may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

Electronic Submission of Comments: 

Interested persons may submit 

comments electronically through the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov. Electronic 

submission of comments allows the 

commenter maximum time to prepare 

and submit a comment, ensures timely 

receipt, and enables Treasury to make 

them available to the public. Comments 

submitted electronically through the 

http://www.regulations.gov website can 

be viewed by other commenters and 

interested members of the public. 

Mail: Send to Department of the 

Treasury, Attention: Laurie McGilvray, 

Office of Gulf Coast Restoration, Office 

of the Fiscal Assistant Secretary, Room 

2112; 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20220. 

In general, Treasury will post all 

comments to http://www.regulations.gov 

without change, including any business 

or personal information provided, such 

as names, addresses, email addresses, or 

telephone numbers. All comments 

received, including attachments and 

other supporting materials, will be part 

of the public record and subject to 

public disclosure. You should submit 

only information that you wish to make 

publicly available. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

Office of Gulf Coast Restoration at 

restoreact@treasury.gov, or Laurie 

McGilvray at 202–622–7340. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The RESTORE Act (33 U.S.C. 1321(t) 

and note) makes funds available for the 

ecological and economic restoration of 

the Gulf Coast Region, and certain 

programs with respect to the Gulf of 

Mexico, through a trust fund in the 

Treasury of the United States known as 

the Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund 

(trust fund). The trust fund holds 80 

percent of the administrative and civil 

penalties paid under the Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act after July 6, 2012 

in connection with the Deepwater 

Horizon Oil Spill. 

Treasury administers two of the five 

components established by the Act, the 

Direct Component and Centers of 

Excellence Research Grants Program. 

The Act also established an 

independent Federal entity, the Gulf 

Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council 

(Council), to administer two 

components of the Act, the 

Comprehensive Plan Component and 

the Spill Impact Component. The 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) administers 

one component, the NOAA RESTORE 

Act Science Program. This NPRM only 

affects grants under the Direct 

Component, Comprehensive Plan 

Component, and Spill Impact 

Component of the Act, which are 

collectively referred to throughout the 

NPRM as the three ‘‘components.’’ 

On December 14, 2015, Treasury 

promulgated a final rule on the 

RESTORE Act, 80 FR 77239, which 

became effective on February 12, 2016. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
28564 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

1Subpart E provides that when a recipient has 

never had a NICRA and receives $35 million or less 

in direct federal funding, a de minimis rate of 10 

percent of modified total direct costs (MTDC) may 

be used to calculate its allowable indirect costs in 

lieu of establishing a NICRA. 2 CFR 200.414(f), 2 

CFR part 200, Appendix VII(D)(1)(b). 

2BP Exploration & Production Inc. began making 

annual civil penalty payments in April 2017, and 

is expected to continue to make annual payments 

through mid-2031 pursuant to a consent decree 

entered on April 4, 2016 under the Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act), of which 

80 percent of the total will be deposited into the 

trust fund and invested. The annual payments into 

the trust fund through 2031 are expected to total 

$4.4 billion. In 2032, BP will make a final payment 

in the form of penalty interest. 

The final rule contains two relevant 

limitations on the amount of grant funds 

that may be used for administrative 

costs. 

First, the final rule subjects the grants 

to government-wide cost principles. 

Treasury’s final rule defines 

‘‘administrative costs’’ as ‘‘indirect costs 

for administration’’ and provides that 

such ‘‘[c]osts must comply with 

administrative requirements and cost 

principles in applicable federal laws 

and policies on grants.’’ 31 CFR 34.2, 

34.200(a)(1). Treasury’s final rule 

excludes ‘‘indirect costs that are 

identified specifically with, or readily 

assignable to, facilities’’ from its 

definition of ‘‘administrative costs.’’ 

Indirect cost principles are contained 

in the Office of Management and 

Budget’s ‘‘Uniform Administrative 

Requirements, Cost Principles, and 

Audit Requirements for Federal 

Awards’’ in 2 CFR part 200, which 

Treasury has adopted. 2 CFR 1000.10. 

Indirect costs are defined in 2 CFR 

200.56 and are allowable subject to 

Subpart E of 2 CFR part 200 and 

Appendix VII. 

Under Subpart E, a grant recipient’s 

negotiated indirect cost rate agreement 

(NICRA) with its cognizant agency 

determines the allowable indirect cost 

rate for the recipient’s grants, taking into 

account the unique circumstances and 

cost structure of the recipient. The 

NICRA, or a de minimis rate if elected, 

must be used across all of the recipient’s 

federal grants.1 2 CFR 200.414(c)(1). In 

accordance with the 2 CFR part 200 

Uniform Guidance, Appendix VII—State 

and Local Government and Indian Tribe 

Indirect Cost Proposals, these allowable 

indirect costs are computed on each 

individual Federal award. 

The second limitation for RESTORE 

awards on the amount of grant funds 

that can be used for administrative costs 

under the three components is a three 

percent administrative cost cap. The Act 

provides that ‘‘[o]f the amounts received 

by a Gulf Coast State . . ., not more 

than 3 percent may be used for 

administrative costs . . . .’’ 33 U.S.C. 

1321(t)(1)(B)(iii)(I). The Act does not 

specify the method by which this three 

percent administrative cost cap is to be 

applied. Treasury’s final rule, however, 

provides that the three percent 

administrative cost cap is to be applied 

on a grant-by-grant basis: ‘‘The three 

percent limit is applied to the total 

amount of funds received by a recipient 

under each grant.’’ 31 CFR 34.204(a). In 

other words, under the current 

regulation, the administrative costs 

associated with each particular grant 

may not exceed three percent of the 

total amount of that grant. 

Thus, under the current regulation, 

allowable administrative costs for a 

particular grant, (i.e., the indirect costs 

for administration) are limited to three 

percent of total funds received under 

that particular grant even in cases where 

a recipient’s NICRA (or its de minimis 

rate) allows more. 

For example, if a recipient with a 

NICRA with a direct labor base were to 

contract out the labor on a project, the 

indirect costs under its NICRA may be 

much lower than three percent of the 

total amount of the grant. In contrast, if 

the bulk of the labor is performed inhouse, the indirect costs will typically 

be much greater than three percent of 

the total amount of the grant. 

To address this issue, Treasury 

proposes to provide a recipient the 

option to apply the three percent 

administrative cost cap, within each 

component, on either a grant-by-grant 

basis or on an aggregate basis. More 

specifically, this proposed revision 

provides that the three percent 

administrative cost cap may be applied 

by component to a Gulf Coast State, 

coastal political subdivision, or coastal 

zone parish’s trust fund allocation, i.e., 

an aggregate of (1) all grants received by 

it under one component, and (2) the 

amount in the trust fund for the same 

component that is allocated to, but not 

yet received by it. As used in this 

NPRM, the phrase ‘‘allocated to, but not 

yet received under that component by a 

Gulf Coast State, coastal political 

subdivision, or coastal zone parish’’ 

refers only to funds presently in the 

trust fund and not to future deposits 

into the trust fund,2 and includes the 

following amounts with respect to each 

component: (1) With respect to the 

Direct Component, amounts made 

available in equal shares for the Gulf 

Coast States in accordance with 31 CFR 

34.302; (2) with respect to the 

Comprehensive Plan Component, the 

estimated aggregate cost of all projects 

included in all approved Funded 

Priorities Lists; and (3) with respect to 

the Spill Impact Component, amounts 

allocated to the Gulf Coast States in 

accordance with 31 CFR 34.502 and 40 

CFR 1800.500. 

The Treasury regulations allocate 

precise sums to specific entities based 

on criteria in the Act, which allows the 

flexibility to administer the 

administrative cost cap on an aggregate 

basis. Permitting recipients to allocate 

administrative costs by component from 

their ‘‘pool’’ in the trust fund toward the 

indirect costs in their grants will enable 

them to recover the maximum amount 

of indirect costs allowed under the Act 

and to more efficiently and effectively 

oversee and manage projects and 

programs. Under this methodology, if a 

recipient’s allowable indirect costs for 

administration for one grant are less 

than three percent of the total amount 

of that grant, the difference would be 

available to cover allowable indirect 

costs for administration exceeding three 

percent on other grants. 

The two methods for applying the 

three percent administrative cost cap are 

illustrated by the examples below. 

Example 1—Grant-by-Grant Method 

A recipient receives a Direct 

Component planning assistance grant 

totaling $216,494. The grant consists of 

$210,000 for direct costs and, under the 

three percent cap, $6,494 for indirect 

costs. 

Example 2—Aggregate Method 

As in the first example, a recipient 

with a NICRA receives a Direct 

Component planning assistance grant 

which includes $210,000 for direct 

costs. Under the aggregate method, its 

grant may also include $56,000 for 

indirect costs under its NICRA, for a 

grant totaling $266,000. The recipient 

has a total administrative cost pool of 

$2,600,000, based on three percent of its 

gross trust fund allocation for the Direct 

Component. The recipient has received 

indirect costs for administration totaling 

$112,000 for two prior grants, leaving a 

net amount of $2,488,000 available in its 

administrative cost pool. Therefore, the 

recipient may use $56,000 for indirect 

costs in this grant award because the 

funds are available in the pool. 

At least annually, Treasury will post 

publicly the amounts available in the 

administrative cost ‘‘pool’’ by 

component, simultaneously with its 

updates to the trust fund allocations. At 

no time, however, may the total amount 

of administrative costs of a Gulf Coast 

State, coastal political subdivision, or 

coastal zone parish exceed three percent 

of the aggregate of (1) all grants received 

by it under one of the three components, 

and (2) the amount in the trust fund for 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 28565 

the same component that is allocated to, 

but not yet received by such Gulf Coast 

State, coastal political subdivision, or 

coastal zone parish. Also, at no time 

would a recipient be able to recover 

more in indirect costs under an 

individual award than it would receive 

under its NICRA or its de minimis rate. 

Treasury invites public comments on 

all aspects of this proposed amendment 

for 30 days, and anticipates publishing 

a final rule on this revision soon after 

the 30 day public comment period. In 

particular, Treasury solicits comments 

from eligible entities on the following: 

(1) Is the aggregate method an attractive 

option and if so, describe the benefits; 

(2) How would you manage and track 

administrative indirect costs under each 

method; (3) Is there an additional 

burden associated with managing the 

administrative indirect cost cap using 

the aggregate method? 

II. This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

For the reasons described above, 

Treasury proposes amending the 

method by which the statutory three 

percent administrative cost cap is 

applied under 31 CFR 34.204(a). 

Conceptually, the proposed revision 

allows each recipient to establish a 

‘‘pool’’ of funds for administrative costs 

under each component if it so chooses. 

Within each component, a recipient 

may budget these funds among its 

grants, consistent with the definition of 

administrative costs at 31 CFR 34.2 and 

Subpart E. Treasury believes that this 

NPRM will help ensure that recipients 

have the necessary funding to efficiently 

and effectively oversee and manage 

projects and programs while ensuring 

compliance with the statutory three 

percent administrative cost cap and a 

recipient’s NICRA or de minimis rate 

under Subpart E. 

To clarify that recipients are no longer 

required to apply the three percent 

administrative cost cap on a grant-bygrant basis, Treasury proposes deleting 

‘‘in a grant’’ from the first sentence of 

§ 34.204(a). Treasury proposes replacing 

the second sentence in existing 

§ 34.204(a), which currently requires the 

three percent administrative cost cap to 

be applied on a grant-by-grant basis, 

with language permitting the three 

percent administrative cost cap to be 

applied on either a grant-by-grant basis 

or on an aggregated basis within each 

component. For the latter method, this 

NPRM states that amounts used for 

administrative costs may not at any time 

exceed three percent of the aggregate of: 

(1) The amounts received under a 

component by a recipient, beginning 

with the first grant through the most 

recent grant, and (2) the amounts in the 

trust fund that are allocated to, but not 

yet received under such component, by 

a Gulf Coast State, coastal political 

subdivision, or coastal zone parish 

under § 34.103, consistent with the 

definition of administrative costs in 

§ 34.2. This proposed revision helps 

ensure that the recipient will not exceed 

the statutory three percent 

administrative cost cap before the 

termination of the trust fund. Please 

note the NPRM does not amend the 

definition of administrative costs in 

§ 34.2. 

Treasury also proposes adding 

‘‘recipient and’’ before ‘‘subrecipient’’ in 

the last sentence of § 34.204(a) to clarify 

that Federal grant law and policies 

apply to recipient costs as well as to 

subrecipient costs. 

Treasury will conduct a retrospective 

analysis of this proposed revision no 

later than seven years after the date it 

becomes effective. This review will 

consider whether the revision ensures 

that the Gulf Coast states, coastal 

political subdivisions, and coastal zone 

parishes have the necessary funding to 

efficiently and effectively oversee and 

manage projects and programs for 

ecological and economic restoration of 

the Gulf Coast Region while ensuring 

compliance with the statutory three 

percent administrative cost cap, and 

whether it helps them to administer 

RESTORE grant projects effectively and 

efficiently. 

III. Procedural Requirements 

A. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires 

agencies to prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 

notice and comment rulemaking 

requirements under the Administrative 

Procedures Act or any other statute, 

unless the agency certifies that the rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

Six of the 20 Louisiana parishes and 

six of the 23 Florida counties eligible to 

receive grants under the RESTORE Act 

have fewer than 50,000 residents. (2010 

U.S. Census) and thus qualify as small 

governmental jurisdictions under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. (5 U.S.C. 

601(5)). Treasury anticipates that this 

proposed revision will have no 

significant economic impact on these 

small entities because all recipients 

have the option to continue applying 

the three percent administrative cost 

cap on a grant-by-grant basis. 

Accordingly, Treasury certifies that the 

amendment to this regulation will not 

have a significant impact upon a 

substantial number of small entities, 

and no regulatory flexibility analysis is 

required. 

B. Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) 

The amendment to the regulation is a 

significant regulatory action as defined 

in Executive Order 12866, as 

supplemented by Executive Order 

13563. 

C. Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance 

The affected program for Treasury is 

listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Program under 21.015, 

Resources and Ecosystems 

Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, 

and Revived Economies of the Gulf 

Coast States. The affected programs for 

the Council are listed under 87.051, and 

87.052, for its Comprehensive Plan and 

Spill Impact Components, respectively. 

List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 34 

Coastal zone, Fisheries, Grant 

programs, Grants administration, 

Intergovernmental relations, Marine 

resources, Natural resources, Oil 

pollution, Research, Science and 

technology, Trusts, Wildlife. 

For the reasons set forth herein, the 

Department of the Treasury proposes to 

amend 31 CFR part 34 to read as 

follows: 

PART 34—RESOURCES AND 

ECOSYSTEMS SUSTAINABILITY, 

TOURIST OPPORTUNITIES, AND 

REVIVED ECONOMIES OF THE GULF 

COAST STATES 

■ 1. The authority citation continues to 

read as follows: 

Authority: 31 U.S.C. 301; 31 U.S.C. 321; 

33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. 

■ 2. Amend § 34.204 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 34.204 Limitations on administrative 

costs and administrative expenses. 

(a)(1) Of the amounts received by a 

Gulf Coast State, coastal political 

subdivision, or coastal zone parish from 

Treasury under the Direct Component, 

or from the Council under the 

Comprehensive Plan Component or 

Spill Impact Component, not more than 

three percent may be used for 

administrative costs. The three percent 

limit on administrative costs may be 

applied to the total amount of funds 

received by a recipient under each of 

the three Components either on a grantby-grant basis or on an aggregate basis. 

For the latter method, amounts used for 

administrative costs under each of the 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
28566 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

three Components may not at any time 

exceed three percent of the aggregate of: 

(i) The amounts received under a 

Component by a recipient, beginning 

with the first grant through the most 

recent grant; and 

(ii) The amounts in the Trust Fund 

that are allocated to, but not yet 

received under such Component by a 

Gulf Coast State, coastal political 

subdivision, or coastal zone parish 

under § 34.103, consistent with the 

definition of administrative costs in 

§ 34.2. The three percent limit does not 

apply to the administrative costs of 

subrecipients. All recipient and 

subrecipient costs are subject to the cost 

principles in Federal laws and policies 

on grants. 

(2) Treasury will conduct a 

retrospective analysis of this provision 

no later than seven years after the date 

it becomes effective. This review will 

consider whether the revision ensures 

that the Gulf Coast states, coastal 

political subdivisions, and coastal zone 

parishes have the necessary funding to 

efficiently and effectively oversee and 

manage projects and programs for 

ecological and economic restoration of 

the Gulf Coast Region while ensuring 

compliance with the statutory three 

percent administrative cost cap, and 

whether it helps them to administer 

RESTORE grant projects effectively and 

efficiently. 

* * * * * 

David A. Lebryk, 

Fiscal Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13227 Filed 6–19–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–25–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter III 

[Docket ID ED–2018–OSERS–0024] 

Proposed Requirement—State 

Technical Assistance Projects To 

Improve Services and Results for 

Children Who Are Deaf-Blind and 

National Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination Center for Children Who 

Are Deaf-Blind (TA&D–DB) 

Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.326T. 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Proposed requirement. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services proposes a requirement under 

the Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination to Improve Services and 

Results for Children with Disabilities 

(TA&D) program. The Assistant 

Secretary may use this requirement for 

a competition in fiscal year (FY) 2018 

and later years. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before July 11, 2018. 

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 ‘‘How to Use 

Regulations.gov.’’ 

• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, 

or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver 

your comments about this proposed 

requirement, address them to Jo Ann 

McCann, U.S. Department of Education, 

400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5162, 

Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 

20202–5076. 

Privacy Note: The Department’s 

policy is to make all comments received 

from members of the public available for 

public viewing in their entirety on the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov. Therefore, 

commenters should be careful to 

include in their comments only 

information that they wish to make 

publicly available. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jo 

Ann McCann, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

Room 5162, Potomac Center Plaza, 

Washington, DC 20202–5076. 

Telephone: (202) 245–7434. Email: 

Jo.Ann.McCann@ed.gov. Tina Diamond, 

400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5136, 

Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 

20202–5076. Telephone: (202) 245– 

6674. Email: Tina.Diamond@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 

document. We urge you to identify 

clearly the specific issue that each 

comment addresses to ensure your 

comments are accurately represented in 

the development of the final 

requirements. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Orders 

12866, 13563, and 13771 and their 

overall requirement of reducing 

regulatory burden that might result from 

this proposed requirement. 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 proposed requirement by 

accessing Regulations.gov. You may also 

inspect the comments in person in 

Room 5145, 550 12th Street SW, 

Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 

4:00 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday 

through Friday of each week except 

Federal holidays. Please contact the 

persons 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 proposed requirement. If 

you want to schedule an appointment 

for this type of accommodation or 

auxiliary aid, please contact the persons 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination to Improve Services and 

Results for Children with Disabilities 

program is to promote academic 

achievement and to improve results for 

children with disabilities by providing 

technical assistance (TA), supporting 

model demonstration projects, 

disseminating useful information, and 

implementing activities that are 

supported by scientifically based 

research. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1461, 1463, 

1481, and 1482. 

Proposed Requirement 

Background 

The Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA) requires that the 

Secretary reserve $12,832,000 of IDEA 

Part D funds each year to address the 

needs of children with deaf-blindness 

(see section 682(d)(1)(A) of IDEA, 20 

U.S.C. 1482(d)). The Office of Special 

Education Programs (OSEP) supports 

children who are deaf-blind and their 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS