### 32487 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 108 / Thursday, June 5, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(2) Polish Fest fireworks display on June 14, 2014, from 10:15 p.m. until
11:15 p.m.;

(3) Summerfest fireworks display on June 25, 2014, and July 2, 2014 from 9:15 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.;

(4) Festa Italiana fireworks display on each day of July 18, 19, and 20, 2014, from 10:15 p.m. until 11:15 p.m.;

(5) Arab World Festival fireworks display on August 9, 2014, from 9:15 p.m. until 10:15 p.m.;

(6) German Fest fireworks display on July 25, 2014, from 10:15 p.m. until
11:15 p.m.;

(7) Irish Fest fireworks display on August 17, 2014, from 10:15 p.m. until
11:15 p.m.;

(8) Indian Summer fireworks display on September 6, 2014, from 9:45 p.m. until 10:45 p.m.

This safety zone will encompass the waters of Lake Michigan within Milwaukee Harbor including the Harbor Island Lagoon enclosed by a line connecting the following points: beginning at 43 ° 02 ′00′′ N, 087 ° 53 ′53 ′′ W;
then south to 43 ° 01 ′44′′ N, 087 ° 53 ′53 ′′ W; then east to 43 ° 01 ′44′′ N, 087 ° 53 ′ 25 ′′ W; then north to 43 ° 02 ′00′′ N,

087 ° 53 ′ 25 ′′ W; then west to the point of origin. All vessels must obtain permission from the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, or his or her on-scene representative to enter, move within, or exit the safety zone. Vessels and persons granted permission to enter the safety zone must obey all lawful orders or directions of the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, or his or her on-scene representative. This document is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.935 Safety Zone, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, WI and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In

addition to this document in the Federal Register , the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with

advance notification of the enforcement period via broadcast Notice to Mariners

or Local Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, or his or her on-scene representative may

be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

Dated: May 21, 2014.
M.W. Sibley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan.

[FR Doc. 2014–13147 Filed 6–4–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND** 
**SECURITY**

**Coast Guard**

**33 CFR Part 165**

**[Docket No. USCG–2014–0338]**

**Safety Zone; Independence Day Fireworks, Kings Beach, CA** 

**AGENCY :**  Coast Guard, DHS.

**ACTION :**  Notice of enforcement of regulation.

**SUMMARY :**  The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone for the Independence Day Fireworks, Kings Beach, CA in the Captain of the Port, San Francisco area of responsibility on July 3, 2014. This action is necessary to protect life and property of the maritime public from the
hazards associated with the fireworks display. During the enforcement period, unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring in the safety zone, unless authorized by the Patrol Commander (PATCOM).

**DATES :**  The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, number 17, will be enforced from 7 a.m. through 10 p.m. on July 3, 2014.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  If you have questions on this notice, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade William Hawn, Sector San Francisco Waterways Safety Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 415–399–7442, email D11-PF-MarineEvents@uscg.mil.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone in navigable waters around and under the fireworks barge within a radius of 100 feet during the loading, transit, and arrival of the fireworks barge to the display location and until the start of the fireworks display. From 7 a.m. until 9 a.m. on July 3, 2014, the fireworks barge will be loading pyrotechnics off of Tahoe Keys Marina in South Lake Tahoe, CA in approximate position

38 ° 56 ′05 ′′ N, 120 ° 00′09′′ W (NAD 83). From 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. on July 3, 2014, the loaded fireworks barge will transit from Tahoe Keys Marina to the launch site off of Kings Beach, CA in approximate position 39 ° 13 ′55 ′′ N,

120 ° 01 ′42 ′′ W (NAD 83) where it will
remain until the commencement of the fireworks display. Upon the
commencement of the 30 minute fireworks display, scheduled to begin at 9:30 p.m. on July 3, 2014, the safety zone will increase in size to encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks barge within a radius 1,000 feet in approximate position 39 ° 13 ′ 55 ′′ N, 120 ° 01 ′42 ′′ W (NAD 83) for the Independence Day Fireworks, Kings beach, CA in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 17. This safety zone will be in effect from 7 a.m. until 10 p.m. on July 3, 2014.

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1191, unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring in the safety zone during all applicable effective dates and times, unless authorized to do so by the PATCOM. Additionally, each person who receives
notice of a lawful order or direction issued by an official patrol vessel shall obey the order or direction. The PATCOM is empowered to forbid entry into and control the regulated area. The PATCOM shall be designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector San Francisco. The PATCOM may, upon request, allow the transit of commercial vessels through regulated areas when it
is safe to do so.

This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.1191 and 5 U.S.C. 552 (a).
In addition to this notice in the Federal Register , the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with extensive advance notification of the safety zone and its enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners. If the Captain of the Port determines that the regulated area
need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, a Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

Dated: May 22, 2014.
Gregory G. Stump, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the

Port San Francisco.

[FR Doc. 2014–13142 Filed 6–4–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 9110–04–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION**

**34 CFR Chapter III**

**[ED–2014–OSERS–0025]**

**Final Priority; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation**  **Research—Rehabilitation Engineering**
**Research Centers**

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

**ACTION :**  Final priority.

[CFDA Number: 84.133E–5.]

**SUMMARY :**  The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services announces a priority for the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program


### 32488 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 108 / Thursday, June 5, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). Specifically, we announce a priority for a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Technologies to Enhance Independence in Daily Living for Adults with Cognitive Impairments. 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 related to independence in daily activities in the home, community, or workplace setting for adults with cognitive impairments.

**DATES :**  Effective Date: This priority is effective July 7, 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, familysupport, and economic and social selfsufficiency of individuals with disabilities, especially individuals with
the most severe disabilities. The program is also intended to improve the
effectiveness of services authorized under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation Act).

Rehabilitation Engineering Research

Centers

The purpose of the RERCs, 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 theRehabilitation Act through welldesigned research, training, technical assistance, and dissemination activities in important topical areas as specified by NIDRR with guidance from its Rehabilitation Research Advisory Council. These activities are designed to benefit rehabilitation service providers, individuals with disabilities, family members, policymakers, and other
research stakeholders. Additional information on the RERC program can
be found at: http://www2.ed.gov/ programs/rerc/index.html#types.

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(3).

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.

We published a notice of proposed priority for this program in the Federal Register on April 2, 2014 (79 FR 18490). 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 we did not receive any comments on the proposed priority.

Final Priority

The Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services establishes a priority for a RERC on Technologies to Enhance Independence in Daily Living for Adults with Cognitive Impairments.

The RERC must focus on innovative technological solutions, new knowledge, and implementation strategies that enhance the independence and self-management of adults with cognitive impairment.

Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate new technologies, or adapt and evaluate existing technologies, to enhance the ability of adults with cognitive impairment to perform daily activities of their choice in the home, community, or workplace. Technologies developed or adapted must be designed for
commercialization as consumer products or for integration into rehabilitation practice or relevant service delivery systems. Research and development topics under this priority may include, but are not limited to: Monitoring and prompting technologies
or other information or communication aids; assistive technologies, including socially assistive robotics; mobile and wearable technologies; virtual reality; and care coordination or tele-health,tele-rehabilitation, and other telesupport systems to facilitate improved activities of daily living.

In responding to this priority, applicants must specify the target populations or subgroups of adults with cognitive impairments that they intend to focus on and identify the setting or settings for which they intend to develop technologies: Home, community, or workplace. Applicants
must also limit the number of research and development projects to a maximum of eight, and restrict the range of different types of technologies to what is manageable with available

resources.

Under this priority, the RERC must be designed to contribute to the following

outcomes:

(a) Increased technical and scientific knowledge relevant to technologies for increasing independence in daily living for adults with cognitive impairments.
The RERC must contribute to this outcome by establishing a rigorous research and development plan that is balanced between technology development or adaption and technology evaluation and incorporates needs assessment, usability testing, and intervention development or efficacy studies, as appropriate. The research and development plan must be designed to build a base of evidence for assessing the usability, accessibility, acceptance, utility, and cost-benefit of technologies intended to improve independence in daily activities for adults with cognitive impairment in the home, community, or workplace settings. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by:

(i) Building a transdisciplinary team
of collaborators from relevant disciplines, such as: Rehabilitation and bio-engineering, computer science, human factors specialists, cognitive and behavioral scientists, clinicians, and other relevant providers;

(ii) Conducting research and research syntheses or secondary analysis of existing data to evaluate user needs and specify the accessibility, acceptance, and human factors design features that will need to be built into the technology solutions developed and evaluated by the RERC to accommodate the cognitive impairments and preferences of the target population;

(iii) Conducting rigorous usability testing in the settings in which the technology will be used;

(iv) Developing and prioritizing a list of evaluation topics that, when addressed, will lead to research-based information on the utility or efficacy of technology solutions developed by the RERC; and

(v) Involving key stakeholders in the research and research planning
activities to maximize the relevance and usefulness of the research products being developed. Stakeholders can include, but are not limited to,
individuals with disabilities and their families; national, State, or local-level policymakers, administrators, or service providers; and industry representatives.


### 32489 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 108 / Thursday, June 5, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(b) Improved usability and effectiveness of technologies, products, devices, systems, performance guidelines, and assessment tools through systematic development or adaptation, testing, and evaluation of innovations. In developing the technologies under this priority the

RERC must:

(i) Incorporate user-centered design strategies and consider the context in which the technology product, device, or system will be used;

(ii) Emphasize the principles of universal design and, as appropriate, conform to human factors standards, such as reliability, safety, and simplicity; accessibility and acceptability to users; protective of users’ privacy preferences; intuitive user interfaces; feedback in meaningful sensory modalities; and appropriateness to diverse populations;

(iii) Incorporate ongoing training opportunities or user supports into the design of the technology or into the practice settings or delivery systems in which the technology will be integrated;
and

(iv) Ensure that the technologies are interoperable within existing rehabilitation systems or home or mobile technologies and that they communicate with existing information technology systems, as appropriate.

(c) Improved research capacity areas that will contribute to enhancing the ability of adults with cognitive impairment to perform daily activities.
The RERC must contribute to this outcome by collaborating with the relevant institutions of higher education, professional associations, clinicians and service providers, and other researchers or educators, as appropriate.

(d) Improved awareness and understanding of cutting-edge developments and promising technology solutions that will contribute to enhancing the ability of adults with cognitive impairment to perform daily activities. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by identifying and communicating with relevant stakeholders, including NIDRR,
individuals with disabilities and 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.

(e) Increased impact of research and development activities carried out under this priority area. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by:

(i) Providing technical assistance to relevant public and private organizations, individuals with disabilities and their families, long-term services and supports providers, and employers on policies, guidelines, and standards; and

(ii) Establishing or contributing to an existing program or service that provides objective information and
technical and consumer reviews about technologies of promise to support independence in daily living for adults with cognitive impairments.

(f) Increased transfer of RERCdeveloped technologies to the marketplace for widespread testing and use by developing and implementing a plan to ensure that technologies developed by the RERC are made available to the public or to service delivery systems that serve the public. This technology transfer plan must be developed in the first year of the projectperiod in consultation with the NIDRRfunded Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer.

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


### 32490 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 108 / Thursday, June 5, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(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 RERC would generate, disseminate, and promote the
use of new information that is intended to improve outcomes for individuals
with disabilities in the areas of community living and participation, employment, and health and function.

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 2, 2014.

Michael K. Yudin, Acting Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.

[FR Doc. 2014–13095 Filed 6–4–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4000–01–P**

**POSTAL SERVICE**

**39 CFR Part 111**

**Elimination of Business Reply Mail (BRM) Parcels; Deferral of** 
**Enforcement Date**

**AGENCY :**  Postal Service TM

. **ACTION :**  Final rule; partial deferral of the
enforcement date.

**SUMMARY :**  The Postal Service givesnotice that it is deferring the previouslyannounced enforcement date of January 25, 2015, for eliminating mailers’ option to use Business Reply Mail ® to pay postage for parcel-shaped items.

**DATES :**  The enforcement date for the relevant portions of the final rule published December 18, 2013 (78 FR 76548), is delayed indefinitely.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Suzanne Newman, 603–673–2002.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The Postal Service hereby gives notice that the enforcement date of January 25, 2015, for eliminating mailers’ option to use Business Reply Mail (BRM) to pay postage for parcel-shaped items, previously published on December 18, 2013, in a final rule in the Federal Register (78 FR 76548–76560), is hereby
deferred until further notice. In particular, this deferral applies to the requirements specified in the
amendment to Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM ® ) 505.1.4.1 (Business Reply Mail—General Information—Description) published at
78 FR 76560. The decision to defer the enforcement date of this change was based on the review of subsequent mailer feedback. All other requirements that were published in the Federal Register (78 FR 76548–76560) will be implemented as specified.

Despite the decision to defer the above referenced enforcement date, the
Postal Service continues to believe that mailers who currently distribute BRM
cartons and labels for the return of parcel-shaped items would be better served by switching to Merchandise

Return Service ® In light of mailers’ continuing eligibility to use BRM for the payment of postage for parcel-shaped items, and the Postal Service’s goal of promoting enhanced package visibility, the Postal Service expects to propose rules mandating the use of an Intelligent
Mail ® package barcode on certain BRM
cartons and labels.

Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice.

[FR Doc. 2014–13042 Filed 6–4–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 7710–12–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 300**

**[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2003–0009; FRL–9911– 82–Region 10]** 

**National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency**  **Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion of the Harbor Oil Superfund Site** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency.

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 10 announces the deletion of the Harbor Oil Superfund Site (Site) located at 11535 North Force Avenue in Portland, Oregon, from the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and the State of Oregon, through the Department of Environmental Quality have determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund.

**DATES :**  Effective Date: This action is effective June 5, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket