Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 17, 2013 / Proposed Rules 22817 

thence southwest to Point 3 in 25°46′00′′ 

N, 80°07′26′′ W; thence west to Point 4 

in position 25°46′00′′ N, 80°07′51′′ W; 

thence northeast back to origin. 

(2) Spectator Area. All waters of the 

Atlantic Ocean east of Miami Beach, FL 

encompassed within an imaginary line 

connecting the following points: starting 

at Point 1 in position 25°48′57′′ N, 

80°06′51′′ W; thence east to Point 2 in 

position 25°48′57′′ N, 80°06′48′′ W; 

thence southwest to Point 3 in 25°47′27′′ 

N, 80°07′06′′ W; thence northwest to 

Point 4 in position 25°47′28′′ N, 

80°07′09′′ W; thence northeast back to 

origin. 

(b) Definition. The term ‘‘designated 

representative’’ means Coast Guard 

Patrol Commanders, including Coast 

Guard coxswains, petty officers, and 

other officers operating Coast Guard 

vessels, and Federal, state, and local 

officers designated by or assisting the 

Captain of the Port Miami in the 

enforcement of the regulated areas. 

(c) Regulations. 

(1) All vessels except those vessels 

participating in or officiating the race 

are prohibited from entering, transiting 

through, anchoring in, or remaining 

within the event area without 

authorization from the Captain of the 

Port Miami or a designated 

representative. 

(2) All vessels, including spectator 

vessels, are prohibited from anchoring 

in the spectator area. On-scene 

designated representatives will direct 

spectator vessels to the spectator area. 

(3) Non-participant persons and 

vessels desiring to enter, transit through, 

anchor in, or remain within the event 

area may contact the Captain of the Port 

Miami by telephone at 305–535–4472, 

or a designated representative via VHF 

radio on channel 16, to seek 

authorization. If authorization to transit 

through or anchor in the regulated area 

is granted by the Captain of the Port 

Miami or a designated representative, 

all persons and vessels receiving such 

authorization must comply with the 

instructions of the Captain of the Port 

Miami or a designated representative. 

(d) Enforcement Date. This rule is 

effective from 9 a.m. on July 19, 2013, 

until 5 p.m. on July 21, 2013. This rule 

will be enforced from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. 

daily from July 19 through July 21, 

2013. 

Dated: March 20, 2013. 

J.B. Pruett, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain 

of the Port Miami. 

[FR Doc. 2013–08990 Filed 4–16–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter III 

[CFDA Number: 84.133E–4.] 

Proposed Priority—National Institute 

on Disability and Rehabilitation 

Research—Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Projects and 

Centers Program—Rehabilitation 

Engineering Research Centers 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Proposed priority. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services proposes a priority for the 

Disability and Rehabilitation Research 

Projects and Centers Program 

administered by the National Institute 

on Disability and Rehabilitation 

Research (NIDRR). Specifically, this 

notice proposes a priority for a 

Rehabilitation Engineering Research 

Center (RERC) on Universal Interfaces 

and Information Technology Access. 

The Assistant Secretary may use this 

priority for competitions in fiscal year 

(FY) 2013 and later years. We take this 

action to focus research attention on 

areas of national need. We intend to use 

this priority to improve rehabilitation 

services and outcomes for individuals 

with disabilities. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before May 17, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments about 

this notice to Marlene Spencer, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW., Room 5133, Potomac 

Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 

20202–2700. 

If you prefer to send your comments 

by email, use the following address: 

marlene.spencer@ed.gov. You must 

include ‘‘Proposed Priorities for RERCs’’ 

and the priority title in the subject line 

of your electronic message. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marlene Spencer. Telephone: (202) 245– 

7532 or by email: 

marlene.spencer@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 

telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay 

Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice of proposed priority is in concert 

with NIDRR’s Long-Range Plan (Plan). 

The Plan, which was published in the 

Federal Register on April 4, 2013 (78 FR 

20299), can be accessed on the Internet 

at the following site: www.ed.gov/about/ 

offices/list/osers/nidrr/policy.html. 

Through the implementation of the 

Plan, NIDRR seeks to: (1) Improve the 

quality and utility of disability and 

rehabilitation research; (2) foster an 

exchange of expertise, information, and 

training methods to facilitate the 

advancement of knowledge and 

understanding of the unique needs of 

traditionally underserved populations; 

(3) determine best strategies and 

programs to improve rehabilitation 

outcomes for underserved populations; 

(4) identify research gaps; (5) identify 

mechanisms for integrating research and 

practice; and (6) disseminate findings. 

This notice proposes a priority that 

NIDRR intends to use for an RERC 

competition in FY 2013 and possibly in 

later years. However, nothing precludes 

NIDRR from publishing additional 

priorities, if needed. Furthermore, 

NIDRR is under no obligation to make 

an award using this priority. The 

decision to make an award will be based 

on the quality of applications received 

and available funding. 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding this 

notice. To ensure that your comments 

have maximum effect in developing the 

notice of final priority, we urge you to 

identify clearly the specific topic that 

each comment addresses. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Orders 12866 

and 13563 and their overall requirement 

of reducing regulatory burden that 

might result from this proposed priority. 

Please let us know of any further ways 

we could reduce potential costs or 

increase potential benefits while 

preserving the effective and efficient 

administration of the program. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about this notice in room 5133, 550 12th 

Street, SW., PCP, Washington, DC, 

between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 

p.m., Washington, DC time, Monday 

through Friday of each week except 

Federal holidays. 

Assistance to Individuals with 

Disabilities in Reviewing the 

Rulemaking Record: On request we will 

provide an appropriate accommodation 

or auxiliary aid to an individual with a 

disability who needs assistance to 

review the comments or other 

documents in the public rulemaking 

record for this notice. If you want to 

schedule an appointment for this type of 

accommodation or auxiliary aid, please 

contact the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the Disability and Rehabilitation 

Research Projects and Centers Program 

is to plan and conduct research, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
22818 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 17, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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 selfsufficiency of individuals with 

disabilities, especially individuals with 

the most severe disabilities; and to 

improve the effectiveness of services 

authorized under the Rehabilitation Act 

of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation 

Act). 

Rehabilitation Engineering Research 

Centers (RERCs) Program 

The purpose of NIDRR’s RERCs 

program, which is funded through the 

Disability and Rehabilitation Research 

Projects and Centers Program, is to 

improve the effectiveness of services 

authorized under the Rehabilitation Act. 

It does so by conducting advanced 

engineering research, developing and 

evaluating innovative technologies, 

facilitating service delivery system 

changes, stimulating the production and 

distribution of new technologies and 

equipment in the private sector, and 

providing training opportunities. RERCs 

seek to solve rehabilitation problems 

and remove environmental barriers to 

improvements in employment, 

community living and participation, 

and health and function outcomes of 

individuals with disabilities. 

The general requirements for RERCs 

are set out in subpart D of 34 CFR part 

350 (What Rehabilitation Engineering 

Research Centers Does the Secretary 

Assist?). 

Additional information on the RERCs 

program can be found at: www.ed.gov/ 

rschstat/research/pubs/index.html. 

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

764(b)(3). 

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 

CFR part 350. 

Proposed Priority 

This notice contains one proposed 

priority. 

Universal Interfaces and Information 

Technology Access 

Background 

In a society in which activities of 

daily life and community participation 

increasingly require information 

technology (IT) access and use, the 

inability to interface effectively with IT 

can be a substantial source of isolation 

and deprivation for individuals with 

disabilities (Emiliani, Stephanidis, & 

Vanderheiden, 2011). IT refers to the 

broad set of technologies employed to 

develop, maintain, and use computer 

systems, software, and networks in 

order to acquire, process, and distribute 

information electronically. IT interfaces 

are the connections between computer 

systems, software, and networks and 

other related devices with human users. 

Individuals with disabilities who lack 

access to, or are unable to interact 

effectively with, IT systems are severely 

limited in opportunities to participate in 

education, employment, social, civic, 

and commercial aspects of daily life 

(National Council on Disability, 2006; 

Emiliani, Stephanidis, & Vanderheiden, 

2011). 

Individuals with disabilities face 

accessibility barriers when they use IT 

and IT interfaces. Many people are 

unable to see, hear, manipulate, 

understand, or read electronic interfaces 

in their standard formats and 

presentations (National Council on 

Disability, 2006; Vicente & Lopez, 2010). 

For many individuals with disabilities, 

as well as for the schools, employers, 

and libraries that might provide 

accessible IT solutions, the options 

available to address accessibility 

barriers are too complicated and 

expensive (National Council on 

Disability, 2006; Vanderheiden, 2008). 

Moreover, while accessible technology 

vendors once needed to provide access 

to just one or two computing platforms, 

a multitude of platforms now exists 

(Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, etc.). 

In addition, users face the challenge of 

working with an increasing number of 

devices with different and often 

confusing IT interfaces designed with 

features that optimize mobility, such as 

small screens, that may not be 

compatible with accessibility solutions 

formerly developed for personal 

computers. These devices include 

telephones, tablets, and e-book readers. 

The rapid development and deployment 

of IT innovations further complicate 

access. 

The rapid development of technology 

and computing platforms threatens to 

expand the digital divide (the gap 

between those that have access to IT and 

those who do not) (Vicente & Lopez, 

2010). Future advances in accessibility 

of the Internet and computer systems 

are necessary so we, as a society, do not 

exclude individuals with disabilities 

from the information that they need to 

be engaged in the workforce and be fully 

informed and active citizens. One 

emerging opportunity in this area is the 

use of cloud computing applications 

that allow for personalized accessible 

interfaces for individuals with 

disabilities. Such interfaces may be 

accessed from any computer, providing 

the possibility of much greater choice 

and independence for individuals with 

disabilities. These interfaces make it 

easier for products to comply with 

widely accepted standards and 

guidelines for accessibility, such as 

those implementing Section 508 of the 

Rehabilitation Act (U.S. Access Board, 

2008), the Web Content Accessibility 

Guidelines of the Web Accessibility 

Initiative (World Wide Web Consortium, 

2008), and the principles of universal 

design (Center for Universal Design, 

1997). By making personalized 

accessible interfaces available for 

mainstream IT products, people with 

disabilities get the benefit of lower cost 

and greater consumer choice, as 

compared to having to use products 

developed only for the use of people 

with disabilities. Accordingly, NIDRR 

seeks to fund an RERC that enhances the 

usability and effectiveness of current 

and emerging IT devices and their 

interfaces so that they are accessible to 

individuals with various disabilities. 

References 

Center for Universal Design (1997). The 

Principles of Universal Design. Retrieved 

from: http://www.ncsu.edu/www/ncsu/ 

design/sod5/cud/about_ud/ 

udprinciplestext.htm. 

Emiliani, P.L., Stephanidis, C., & 

Vanderheiden, G. (2011). Technology and 

inclusion—Past, present and foreseeable 

future. Technology and Disability 23(3), 101– 

114. 

National Council on Disability. (2006). 

Over the horizon: Potential impact of 

emerging trends in information and 

communication technology on disability 

policy and practice. Washington, DC. 

U.S. Access Board (n.d.)Section 508 

Homepage: Electronic and Information 

Technology. Retrieved from: http:// 

www.access-board.gov/508.htm. 

Vanderheiden, G. C. (2008). Ubiquitous 

accessibility, common technology core, and 

micro assistive technology. ACM 

Transactions in Accessible Computing 1(2), 

10.1–7. 

Vicente, M. R., & Lopez, A. J. (2010). A 

multidimensional analysis of the disability 

digital divide: some evidence for Internet 

use. The Information Society 26(1), 48–64. 

World Wide Web Consortium (2008). Web 

Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 

2.0. Retrieved from: http://www.w3.org/TR/ 

WCAG20/. 

Proposed Priority 

Under this priority, the RERC must 

research, develop, and evaluate 

innovative solutions to the problem of 

inaccessibility of current and emerging 

information technologies and 

technology interfaces for individuals 

with disabilities. These solutions may 

include cloud computing applications 

that allow for personalized accessible 

interfaces. The RERC must focus its 

research and development activities on 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 17, 2013 / Proposed Rules 22819 

promoting access for individuals with 

disabilities to the multiple technologies 

used in the home, the community, and 

the workplace. The RERC must research, 

develop, and evaluate built-in 

accessibility and flexibility features in 

interfaces of mainstream products. The 

technical approaches developed by the 

RERC must have the following 

characteristics: (i) They must make it 

possible for people with disabilities to 

access and use the same mainstream IT 

products as consumers generally, to the 

greatest extent achievable, rather than 

requiring people with disabilities to use 

specialized products; (ii) They must 

support access and use by people with 

the widest achievable range of 

disabilities, rather than being limited 

only to particular disability groups; (iii) 

They must provide as much as possible 

a consistent user interface, when 

applied to different products; (iv) They 

must be designed to be extensible, so as 

to be applicable to new IT products as 

they emerge; and (v) They must be 

developed along with methods that 

would enable developers of IT products 

to incorporate the new approaches into 

IT products at reasonable cost. In 

addition, this RERC must research, 

develop, and evaluate simple and 

inexpensive ways to activate and 

control IT access features for use by 

individuals with disabilities. This RERC 

must work collaboratively with the 

RERC on Telecommunication Access 

and the RERC on Mobile Wireless 

Technologies. 

General RERC Requirements 

Under this priority, the RERC must be 

designed to contribute to the following 

outcomes: 

(1) Increased technical and scientific 

knowledge relevant to its priority 

research area. The RERC must 

contribute to this outcome by 

conducting high-quality, rigorous 

research and development projects. 

(2) Increased innovation in 

technologies, products, environments, 

performance guidelines, and monitoring 

and assessment tools applicable to its 

priority research area. The RERC must 

contribute to this outcome through the 

development and testing of these 

innovations. 

(3) Improved research capacity in its 

priority research area. The RERC must 

contribute to this outcome by 

collaborating with the relevant industry, 

professional associations, institutions of 

higher education, health care providers, 

or educators, as appropriate. 

(4) Improved usability and 

accessibility of products and 

environments in the RERC’s priority 

research area. The RERC must 

contribute to this outcome by 

emphasizing the principles of universal 

design in its product research and 

development. For purposes of this 

section, the term ‘‘universal design’’ 

means the design of products and 

environments to be usable by all people, 

to the greatest extent possible, without 

the need for adaptation or specialized 

design. 

(5) Improved awareness and 

understanding of cutting-edge 

developments in technologies within its 

priority research area. 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; editors of professional 

journals; manufacturers; and other 

interested parties regarding trends and 

evolving product concepts related to its 

priority research area. 

(6) Increased dissemination of 

research in the priority research area. 

The RERC must contribute to this 

outcome by providing technical 

assistance to relevant public and private 

organizations, individuals with 

disabilities, employers, and schools on 

policies, guidelines, and standards 

related to its priority research area. 

(7) Increased transfer of RERCdeveloped technologies to the 

marketplace. The RERC must contribute 

to this outcome by developing and 

implementing a plan for ensuring that 

all technologies developed by the RERC 

are made available to the public. The 

technology transfer plan must be 

developed in the first year of the project 

period in consultation with the NIDRRfunded Disability Rehabilitation 

Research Project, Center on Knowledge 

Translation for Technology Transfer. 

In addition, under this priority, the 

RERC must— 

• Have the capability to design, build, 

and test prototype devices and assist in 

the technology transfer and knowledge 

translation of successful solutions to 

relevant production and service delivery 

settings; 

• Evaluate the efficacy and safety of 

its new products, instrumentation, or 

assistive devices; 

• Provide as part of its proposal, and 

then implement, a plan that describes 

how it will include, as appropriate, 

individuals with disabilities or their 

representatives in all phases of its 

activities, including research, 

development, training, dissemination, 

and evaluation; 

• Provide as part of its proposal, and 

then implement, a plan to disseminate 

its research results to individuals with 

disabilities and their representatives; 

disability organizations; service 

providers; professional journals; 

manufacturers; and other interested 

parties. In meeting this requirement, 

each RERC may use a variety of 

mechanisms to disseminate information, 

including state-of-the-science 

conferences, webinars, Web sites, and 

other dissemination methods; and 

• Coordinate research projects of 

mutual interest with relevant NIDRRfunded projects, as identified through 

consultation with the NIDRR project 

officer. 

Types of Priorities 

When inviting applications for a 

competition using one or more 

priorities, we designate the type of each 

priority as absolute, competitive 

preference, or invitational through a 

notice in the Federal Register. The 

effect of each type of priority follows: 

Absolute priority: Under an absolute 

priority, we consider only applications 

that meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3)). 

Competitive preference priority: 

Under a competitive preference priority, 

we give competitive preference to an 

application by (1) awarding additional 

points, depending on the extent to 

which the application meets the priority 

(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting 

an application that meets the priority 

over an application of comparable merit 

that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(2)(ii)). 

Invitational priority: Under an 

invitational priority, we are particularly 

interested in applications that meet the 

priority. However, we do not give an 

application that meets the priority a 

preference over other applications (34 

CFR 75.105(c)(1)). 

Final Priority 

We will announce the final priority in 

a notice in the Federal Register. We will 

determine the final priority after 

considering responses to this notice and 

other information available to the 

Department. This notice does not 

preclude us from proposing additional 

priorities, requirements, definitions, or 

selection criteria, subject to meeting 

applicable rulemaking requirements. 

Note: This notice does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we choose 

to use this priority, we invite applications 

through a notice in the Federal Register. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Secretary must determine whether this 

regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and, 

therefore, subject to the requirements of 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
22820 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 17, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

the Executive order and subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866 defines a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as an action likely to 

result in a rule that may— 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more, or 

adversely affect a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities in a material way (also 

referred to as an ‘‘economically 

significant’’ rule); 

(2) Create serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

stated in the Executive order. 

This proposed regulatory action is not 

a significant regulatory action subject to 

review by OMB under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. 

We have also reviewed this regulatory 

action under Executive Order 13563, 

which supplements and explicitly 

reaffirms the principles, structures, and 

definitions governing regulatory review 

established in Executive Order 12866. 

To the extent permitted by law, 

Executive Order 13563 requires that an 

agency— 

(1) Propose or adopt regulations only 

upon a reasoned determination that 

their benefits justify their costs 

(recognizing that some benefits and 

costs are difficult to quantify); 

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the 

least burden on society, consistent with 

obtaining regulatory objectives and 

taking into account—among other things 

and to the extent practicable—the costs 

of cumulative regulations; 

(3) In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, select those 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety, 

and other advantages; distributive 

impacts; and equity); 

(4) To the extent feasible, specify 

performance objectives, rather than the 

behavior or manner of compliance a 

regulated entity must adopt; and 

(5) Identify and assess available 

alternatives to direct regulation, 

including economic incentives—such as 

user fees or marketable permits—to 

encourage the desired behavior, or 

provide information that enables the 

public to make choices. 

Executive Order 13563 also requires 

an agency ‘‘to use the best available 

techniques to quantify anticipated 

present and future benefits and costs as 

accurately as possible.’’ The Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB has emphasized that these 

techniques may include ‘‘identifying 

changing future compliance costs that 

might result from technological 

innovation or anticipated behavioral 

changes.’’ 

We are issuing this proposed priority 

only upon a reasoned determination 

that its benefits justify its costs. In 

choosing among alternative regulatory 

approaches, we selected those 

approaches that would maximize net 

benefits. Based on the analysis that 

follows, the Department believes that 

this proposed priority is consistent with 

the principles in Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action would not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, 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 Programs have been well 

established over the years, as projects 

similar to the one envisioned by the 

proposed priority have been completed 

successfully. Establishing new RERCs 

based on the proposed priority would 

generate new knowledge through 

research and development and improve 

the lives of individuals with disabilities. 

The new RERCs would generate, 

disseminate, and promote the use of 

new information that would improve 

the options for individuals with 

disabilities to fully participate in their 

communities. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is not subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc) 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 or TTY, call the 

FRS, toll free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

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: April 12, 2013. 

Michael K. Yudin, 

Delegated the authority to perform the 

functions and duties of Assistant Secretary 

for Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services. 

[FR Doc. 2013–09043 Filed 4–16–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

39 CFR Part 3001 

[Order No. 1677; Docket No. RM2013–1] 

Revisions to Rules of Practice 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This notice addresses 

proposed revisions to the Commission’s 

rules of practice. The revisions (as 

clarified by an errata issued March 19, 

2013) are intended to update existing 

rules due to recent statutory and 

regulatory changes; make technical 

editorial changes; and foster clarity and 

simplicity to reduce the potential for 

confusion. The notice also takes related 

administrative steps, including an 

invitation for comments on the 

proposed revisions. Comments will 

assist the Commission in developing a 

final rule. 

DATES: Comment date: Comments due 

on or before May 17, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

electronically by accessing the ‘‘Filing 

Online’’ link in the banner at the top of 

the Commission’s Web site (http:// 

www.prc.gov) or by directly accessing 

the Commission’s Filing Online system 

at https://www.prc.gov/prc-pages/filingonline/login.aspx. Commenters who 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS