Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 37 / Wednesday, February 25, 2015 / Notices 10099 

In compliance with the requirements 

of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

Administration for Children and 

Families is soliciting public comment 

on the specific aspects of the 

information collection described above. 

Copies of the proposed collection of 

information can be obtained and 

comments may be forwarded by writing 

to the Administration for Children and 

Families, Office of Administration, 

Office Planning, Research and 

Evaluation, 370 L’Enfant Promenade 

SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF 

Reports Clearance Officer. Email 

address: infocollection@acf.hhs.gov. All 

requests should be identified by the title 

of the information collection. 

The Department specifically requests 

comments on: (a) Whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information; (c) 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (d) 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Consideration will be given to 

comments and suggestions submitted 

within 60 days of this publication. 

Robert Sargis, 

Reports Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03830 Filed 2–24–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4184–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Administration for Community Living 

[CFDA Number: 84.133B–1] 

Proposed Priority—National Institute 

on Disability, Independent Living, and 

Rehabilitation Research— 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Centers 

AGENCY: Administration for Community 

Living, HHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed priority. 

SUMMARY: The Administrator of the 

Administration for Community Living 

proposes a priority for the 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Center (RRTC) Program administered by 

the National Institute on Disability, 

Independent Living, and Rehabilitation 

Research (NIDILRR). Specifically, this 

notice proposes a priority for an RRTC 

on Employer Practices Leading to 

Successful Employment Outcomes for 

Individuals with Disabilities. We take 

this action to focus research attention on 

an area of national need. We intend this 

priority to contribute to improved 

employment practices and successful 

employment outcomes for individuals 

with disabilities. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before March 27, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

or via postal mail or commercial 

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 ‘‘Are you new to the site?’’ 

• Postal Mail or Commercial Delivery: 

If you mail or deliver your comments 

about these proposed regulations, 

address them to Patricia Barrett, U.S. 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 5142, Potomac Center Plaza 

(PCP), Washington, DC 20202–2700. 

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: 

Patricia Barrett. 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: This 

notice of proposed priority is in concert 

with NIDILRR’s currently approved 

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. 

The Plan identifies a need for research 

and training regarding employment of 

individuals with disabilities. To address 

this need, NIDILRR seeks to: (1) Improve 

the quality and utility of disability and 

rehabilitation research; (2) foster an 

exchange of research findings, expertise, 

and other information to advance 

knowledge and understanding of the 

needs of individuals with disabilities 

and their family members, including 

those from among traditionally 

underserved populations; (3) determine 

effective practices, programs, and 

policies to improve community living 

and participation, employment, and 

health and function outcomes for 

individuals with disabilities of all ages; 

(4) identify research gaps and areas for 

promising research investments; (5) 

identify and promote effective 

mechanisms for integrating research and 

practice; and (6) disseminate research 

findings to all major stakeholder groups, 

including individuals with disabilities 

and their family members in formats 

that are appropriate and meaningful to 

them. 

This notice proposes one priority that 

NIDILRR intends to use for one or more 

competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2015 

and possibly later years. NIDILRR is 

under no obligation to make an award 

under this priority. The decision to 

make an award will be based on the 

quality of applications received and 

available funding. NIDILRR may publish 

additional priorities, as needed. 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding this 

proposed priority. To ensure that your 

comments have maximum effect in 

developing the final priority, we urge 

you to identify clearly the specific topic 

within the priority 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 by 

following the instructions found under 

the ‘‘Are you new to the site?’’ portion 

of the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

wwww.regulations.gov. Any comments 

sent to NIDILRR via postal mail or 

commercial delivery can be viewed in 

Room 5142, 550 12th Street SW., PCP, 

Washington, DC, between the hours of 

8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Washington, DC 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10100 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 37 / Wednesday, February 25, 2015 / Notices 

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, 

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 Research and Training 

Centers 

The purpose of the RRTCs, which are 

funded through the Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Projects and 

Centers Program, is to achieve the goals 

of, and improve the effectiveness of, 

services authorized under the 

Rehabilitation Act through welldesigned research, training, technical 

assistance, and dissemination activities 

in important topical areas as specified 

by NIDILRR. These activities are 

designed to benefit rehabilitation 

service providers, individuals with 

disabilities, family members, 

policymakers and other research 

stakeholders. Additional information on 

the RRTC program can be found at: 

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/rrtc/

index.html#types. 

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

and 764(b)(2). 

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 

CFR part 350. 

Proposed Priority: This notice 

contains one proposed priority. 

RRTC on Employer Practices Leading to 

Successful Employment Outcomes for 

Individuals With Disabilities 

Background: Individuals with 

disabilities experience lower rates and 

quality of employment than those 

without disabilities. The percentage of 

the population that is employed is lower 

for individuals with disabilities (17.6%) 

than for individuals without disabilities 

(64.0%), and this difference has been 

relatively stable since 2012 (U.S. 

Department of Labor, 2014a, 2014b). Of 

those individuals who are employed, 

individuals with disabilities are more 

likely to work part time (34%) than are 

individuals without disabilities (19%) 

(U.S. Department of Labor, 2014a), and 

individuals with disabilities earn less 

than do individuals without disabilities 

(Brault, 2012; Schur et al., 2009; U.S. 

Department of Commerce, 2013). In 

addition, employees with disabilities 

have more limited opportunities for 

experiences related to retention and 

advancement, such as training and 

participation in decision-making, and 

less job security (Schur et al., 2009). 

Although the employment of 

individuals with disabilities is the result 

of a complex interaction among many 

variables, employer practices comprise 

an important factor in the employment 

of individuals with disabilities. In 

recent years, researchers (Bruye`re & 

Barrington, 2012; Chan et al., 2010a) 

have recognized the importance of 

considering demand-side, i.e., 

employer, variables to understand and 

decrease the difference in employment 

outcomes between individuals with and 

without disabilities. In addition, a 

number of Federal initiatives have 

highlighted the need for employers to 

change their practices to improve 

employment outcomes for individuals 

with disabilities (e.g., new regulations 

for Section 503 of the Rehabilitation 

Act, establishing nationwide 7% 

employment goals for qualified 

individuals with disabilities for 

companies doing business with the 

Federal government; Executive Order 

13548 (2010), ‘‘Increasing Federal 

Employment of Individuals with 

Disabilities’’). 

A number of employer practices are 

associated with better employment 

outcomes (i.e., hiring, retention, or 

advancement) for individuals with 

disabilities. These include, but are not 

limited to: Employer knowledge of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act, the 

inclusion of disability in employer 

diversity plans, diversity training for 

management, targeted recruitment, and 

employer-provided accommodations 

(Bruye`re & Barrington, 2012; Chan et al., 

2010b; Hirsh & Kmec, 2009; Schur et al., 

2009). Factors associated with 

employment of individuals with 

disabilities vary by employer size, 

industry type, and sector of the 

economy (U.S. Department of Labor, 

2008; Bruye`re & Barrington, 2012; Fraser 

et al., 2010). 

However, knowledge of employer 

practices that are associated with better 

employment outcomes for individuals 

with disabilities does not tell us 

whether those practices actually caused 

those outcomes (Bruye`re & Barrington, 

2012; Fraser et al., 2011). In addition to 

the need for a stronger evidence base for 

the effectiveness of promising employer 

practices, there is a need for the 

development of measures that 

employers can use to track employment 

outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities (Erickson et al., 2013; Von 

Schrader et al., 2013). Both of these 

types of knowledge are critical to the 

development of effective workplace 

programs and practices to improve 

employment outcomes for individuals 

with disabilities. 

References 

Brault, M. W. (2012). Americans with 

disabilities: 2010. U.S. Department of 

Commerce, Economics and Statistics 

Administration, US Census Bureau. 

Bruye`re, S. M., & Barrington, L. (2012). 

Current issues, controversies, and 

solutions. In S.M. Bruye`re and L. 

Barrington, (Eds.), Employment and 

work. Sage Publications. 

Chan, F., Strauser, D., Gervey, R., & Lee, E– 

J. (2010a). Introduction to demand-side 

factors related to employment of people 

with disabilities. Journal of 

Occupational Rehabilitation, 20, 407– 

411. 

Chan, F., Straser, D., Maher, P., Lee, E–J., 

Jones, R., & Johnson, E. T. (2010b). 

Demand-side factors related to 

employment of people with disabilities: 

A survey of employers in the Midwest 

region of the United Sates. Journal of 

Occupational Rehabilitation, 20, 412– 

419. 

Erickson, W. A., von Schrader, S., Bruye`re, 

S. M., & VanLooy, S. A. (2013). The 

employment environment: Employer 

perspectives, policies, and practices 

regarding the employment of persons 

with disabilities. Rehabilitation 

Counseling Bulletin, 0034355213509841. 

Exec. Order No. 13548, 3 C. F. R. 168 (2010). 

Fraser, R. T., Johnson, K., Hebert, J., Ajzen, 

I., Copeland, J., Brown, P., & Chan, F. 

(2010). Understanding employers’ hiring 

intentions in relation to qualified 

workers with disabilities: Preliminary 

findings. Journal of Occupational 

Rehabilitation, 20(4), 420–426. 

Fraser, R., Ajzen, I., Johnson, K., Hebert, J., 

& Chan, F. (2011). Understanding 

employers’ hiring intention in relation to 

qualified workers with disabilities. 

Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 

35(1), 1–11. 

Hirsh, E., & Kmec, J. A. (2009). Human 

resource structures: Reducing 

discrimination or raising rights 

awareness?. Industrial Relations: A 

Journal of Economy and Society, 48(3), 

512–532. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 37 / Wednesday, February 25, 2015 / Notices 10101 

Schur, L., Kruse, D., Blasi, J., & Blanck, P. 

(2009). Is disability disabling in all 

workplaces? Workplace disparities and 

corporate culture. Industrial Relations: A 

Journal of Economy and Society, 48(3), 

381–410. 

Von Schrader, S., Malzer, V., & Bruye`re, S. 

(2013). Perspectives on disability 

disclosure: The importance of employer 

practices and workplace climate. 

Employee Responsibilities and Rights 

Journal, 26(4), 237–255. 

U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census 

Bureau. (2013). Selected economic 

characteristics for the civilian 

noninstitutionalized population by 

disability status. 2013 American 

Community Survey 1-year estimates. 

http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/

tableservices/jsf/pages/

productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_13_1YR_

S1811&prodType=table Retrieved 

November 19, 2014. 

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (2014a). Persons with A 

Disability: Labor Force Characteristics— 

2013. Available at http://www.bls.gov/

news.release/pdf/disabl.pdf Retrieved 

November 14, 2014. 

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (2014b). Table A6. 

Employment status of the civilian 

population by sex, age, and disability 

status, not seasonally adjusted. Available 

at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/

empsit.t06.htm Retrieved November 19, 

2014. 

U.S. Department of Labor, Office on 

Disability Employment Policy (2008). 

Survey of Employer Perspectives on the 

Employment of People with Disabilities. 

Technical report. Available at http://

www.dol.gov/odep/documents/survey_

report_jan_09.doc. Retrieved February 2, 

2015. 

Definitions: The research that is 

proposed under this priority must be 

focused on one or more stages of 

research. If the RRTC is to conduct 

research that can be categorized under 

more than one research stage, or 

research that progresses from one stage 

to another, those research stages must be 

clearly specified. For purposes of this 

priority, the stages of research are from 

the notice of final priorities and 

definitions published in the Federal 

Register on June 7, 2013 (78 FR 34261). 

(a) Exploration and Discovery means 

the stage of research that generates 

hypotheses or theories by conducting 

new and refined analyses of data, 

producing observational findings, and 

creating other sources of research-based 

information. This research stage may 

include identifying or describing the 

barriers to and facilitators of improved 

outcomes of individuals with 

disabilities, as well as identifying or 

describing existing practices, programs, 

or policies that are associated with 

important aspects of the lives of 

individuals with disabilities. Results 

achieved under this stage of research 

may inform the development of 

interventions or lead to evaluations of 

interventions or policies. The results of 

the exploration and discovery stage of 

research may also be used to inform 

decisions or priorities. 

(b) Intervention Development means 

the stage of research that focuses on 

generating and testing interventions that 

have the potential to improve outcomes 

for individuals with disabilities. 

Intervention development involves 

determining the active components of 

possible interventions, developing 

measures that would be required to 

illustrate outcomes, specifying target 

populations, conducting field tests, and 

assessing the feasibility of conducting a 

well-designed interventions study. 

Results from this stage of research may 

be used to inform the design of a study 

to test the efficacy of an intervention. 

(c) Intervention Efficacy means the 

stage of research during which a project 

evaluates and tests whether an 

intervention is feasible, practical, and 

has the potential to yield positive 

outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities. Efficacy research may assess 

the strength of the relationships 

between an intervention and outcomes, 

and may identify factors or individual 

characteristics that affect the 

relationship between the intervention 

and outcomes. Efficacy research can 

inform decisions about whether there is 

sufficient evidence to support ‘‘scalingup’’ an intervention to other sites and 

contexts. This stage of research can 

include assessing the training needed 

for wide-scale implementation of the 

intervention, and approaches to 

evaluation of the intervention in real 

world applications. 

(d) Scale-Up Evaluation means the 

stage of research during which a project 

analyzes whether an intervention is 

effective in producing improved 

outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities when implemented in a realworld setting. During this stage of 

research, a project tests the outcomes of 

an evidence-based intervention in 

different settings. It examines the 

challenges to successful replication of 

the intervention, and the circumstances 

and activities that contribute to 

successful adoption of the intervention 

in real-world settings. This stage of 

research may also include well-designed 

studies of an intervention that has been 

widely adopted in practice, but that 

lacks a sufficient evidence-base to 

demonstrate its effectiveness. 

Proposed Priority: The Administrator 

for Community Living proposes a 

priority for an RRTC on Employer 

Practices Leading to Successful 

Employment Outcomes for Individuals 

with Disabilities. The purpose of the 

RRTC is to generate new knowledge 

about effective employer practices that 

support successful employment 

outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities. The RRTC must contribute 

to improving the employment outcomes 

of individuals with disabilities by: 

(a) Identifying promising employer 

practices most strongly associated with 

desired employment outcomes for 

individuals with disabilities as well as 

the prevalence of these practices. 

Practices should include those related to 

the hiring, retention, and advancement 

of individuals with disabilities. 

(b) Developing measures of 

employment outcomes that include 

hiring, retention, and advancement of 

individuals with disabilities. These 

measures must be developed for use by 

employers and other stakeholders. 

These measures may also include 

employment quality, such as, but not 

limited to, earnings, full- or part-time 

employment, or opportunities for onthe-job training. In developing these 

measures, the RRTC must collaborate 

with the NIDILRR-funded RRTC on 

Employment Policy and Measurement. 

(c) Generating new knowledge of the 

effectiveness of promising employer 

practices by identifying or developing, 

and then implementing and evaluating 

pilot workplace program(s) based on 

practices identified in (a). This work 

should be conducted in employment 

settings in collaboration with 

employers, and should include: 

(1) Implementation of practices that 

are particularly likely to be effective in 

improving employment outcomes for 

individuals with disabilities; 

(2) Implementation of practices 

among different types of employers (e.g., 

small v. large employers, private v. 

public sector employers); 

(3) Collection of data using, but not 

limited to, outcome measures from (b) 

above. 

(d) Focusing its research on one or 

more specific stages of research. If the 

RRTC is to conduct research that can be 

categorized under more than one of the 

research stages, or research that 

progresses from one stage to another, 

those stages should be clearly justified. 

(e) Serving as a national resource 

center related to employment for 

individuals with disabilities, their 

families, and other stakeholders by 

conducting knowledge translation 

activities that include, but are not 

limited to: 

(1) Providing information and 

technical assistance to employers, 

employment service providers, 

employer groups, individuals with 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10102 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 37 / Wednesday, February 25, 2015 / Notices 

disabilities and their representatives, 

and other key stakeholders; 

(2) Providing training, including 

graduate, pre-service, and in-service 

training, to employers and employer 

groups, to facilitate more effective 

employer practices for individuals with 

disabilities. This training may be 

provided through conferences, 

workshops, public education programs, 

in-service training programs, and 

similar activities; 

(3) Disseminating research-based 

information and materials related to 

increasing employment levels for 

individuals with disabilities; and 

(4) Involving key stakeholder groups 

in the activities conducted under 

paragraphs (a) and (b) of this priority to 

promote the new knowledge generated 

by the RRTC. 

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 or 

in a Funding Opportunity Announcement 

posted at www.grants.gov. 

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 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 would 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 Program have been well 

established over the years. Projects 

similar to one envisioned by the 

proposed priority have been completed 

successfully, and the proposed priority 

would generate new knowledge through 

research. The new RRTC would 

generate, disseminate, and promote the 

use of new information that would 

improve outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities in the area of employment. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is not subject to Executive 

Order 12372. 

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: February 19, 2015. 

Kathy Greenlee, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03877 Filed 2–24–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4154–01–P 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES