21168 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

11. Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it would not have 

a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

12. Energy Effects 

This proposed rule is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. 

13. Technical Standards 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

14. Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions that do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. This proposed 

rule involves establishing a safety zone. 

This rule may be categorically excluded 

from further review under paragraph 

34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant 

Instruction. A preliminary 

environmental analysis checklist 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. We seek any 

comments or information that may lead 

to the discovery of a significant 

environmental impact from this 

proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREA AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T01–0178 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T01–0178 Safety Zone; Ellie’s 

Wedding Fireworks Display; Long Island 

Sound; Greenwich, CT. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

safety zone: All waters of Long Island 

Sound within a 600-foot radius of the 

fireworks barge located about 1.5 miles 

south of Greenwich Point Park, 

Greenwich, CT in approximate position 

40°58′53.76′′N, 073°34′47.95′′W North 

American Datum 1983. 

(b) Enforcement Period. This rule will 

be enforced on June 27, 2014 from 6:30 

p.m. until 10:30 p.m. 

(c) Regulations. The general 

regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23 

apply. During the enforcement period, 

entering into, transiting through, 

remaining, mooring or anchoring within 

this safety zone is prohibited unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port 

(COTP) or the designated 

representatives. 

(1) Definitions. The following 

definitions apply to this section: 

(i) Designated Representative. A 

‘‘designated representative’’ is any Coast 

Guard commissioned, warrant or petty 

officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has 

been designated by the COTP, Sector 

Long Island Sound, to act on his or her 

behalf. The designated representative 

may be on an official patrol vessel or 

may be on shore and will communicate 

with vessels via VHF–FM radio or 

loudhailer. In addition, members of the 

Coast Guard Auxiliary may be present to 

inform vessel operators of this 

regulation. 

(ii) Official Patrol Vessels. Official 

patrol vessels may consist of any Coast 

Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or 

local law enforcement vessels assigned 

or approved by the COTP Sector Long 

Island Sound. 

(iii) Spectators. All persons and 

vessels not registered with the event 

sponsor as participants or official patrol 

vessels. 

(2) Spectators desiring to enter or 

operate within the regulated area should 

contact the COTP Sector Long Island 

Sound at 203–468–4401 (Sector Long 

Island Sound command center) or the 

designated representative via VHF 

channel 16 to obtain permission to do 

so. Spectators given permission to enter 

or operate in the regulated area must 

comply with all directions given to 

them by the COTP Sector Long Island 

Sound or the designated on-scene 

representative. 

(3) Upon being hailed by an official 

patrol vessel or the designated 

representative, by siren, radio, flashing 

light or other means, the operator of the 

vessel shall proceed as directed. Failure 

to comply with a lawful direction may 

result in expulsion from the area, 

citation for failure to comply, or both. 

(4) Fireworks barges used in this 

location will have a sign on their port 

and starboard side labeled 

‘‘FIREWORKS—STAY AWAY’’. This 

sign will consist of 10 inch high by 1.5 

inch wide red lettering on a white 

background. 

Dated: March 25, 2014. 

E.J. Cubanski, III, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sector Long Island Sound. 

[FR Doc. 2014–08220 Filed 4–14–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter III 

[Docket ID ED–2014–OSERS–0012] 

Proposed Priorities—National Institute 

on Disability and Rehabilitation 

Research—Rehabilitation Research 

and Training Centers 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Proposed priorities. 

[CFDA Numbers: 84.133B–6 and B–7.] 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services proposes two priorities for the 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Center (RRTC) Program administered by 

the National Institute on Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). 

Specifically, this notice proposes 

priorities for an RRTC on Transition to 

Employment for Youth and Young 

Adults with Serious Mental Health 

Conditions and Community Living and 

Participation of Youth and Young 

Adults with Serious Mental Health 

Conditions. This RRTC will be jointly 

funded by NIDRR and the Substance 

Abuse Mental Health Services 

Administration (SAMHSA). We take 

this action to focus research attention on 

an area of national need. We intend 

these priorities to contribute to 

improved outcomes in the transition to 

employment and in community living 

and participation of youth and young 

adults with serious mental health 

conditions and psychiatric disabilities. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before May 15, 2014. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 21169 

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 ‘‘Are you new to the site?’’ 

• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, 

or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver 

your comments about these proposed 

regulations, address them to Patricia 

Barrett, U.S. Department of Education, 

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, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 5142, 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: These 

proposed priorities are in concert with 

NIDRR’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. 

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 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 families in formats that are 

appropriate and meaningful to them. 

This notice proposes two priorities 

that NIDRR intends to use for one or 

more competitions in FY 2014 and 

possibly later years. NIDRR is under no 

obligation to make an award under these 

priorities. The decision to make an 

award will be based on the quality of 

applications received and available 

funding. NIDRR may publish additional 

priorities, as needed. 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding these 

priorities. To ensure that your 

comments have maximum effect in 

developing the final priorities, 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 these proposed 

priorities. 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 programs. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about these proposed priorities in Room 

5142, 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, 

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 NIDRR. 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. 

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

764(b)(2). 

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 

CFR part 350. 

Proposed Priorities 

This notice contains two proposed 

priorities: 

Background 

The estimated prevalence of serious 

mental health conditions (SMHC) in 

young adults ages 18 to 26 ranges from 

6 percent to 8 percent (U.S. Government 

Accountability Office [GAO], 2008; 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health 

Services Administration [SAMHSA], 

2012a). In addition, the prevalence of 

serious emotional disturbance in youth 

ages 13 to 17 has been estimated to be 

about 8 percent (Kessler et. al., 2012). 

Some youth and young adults are at 

particularly high risk for challenges 

associated with SMHC, including youth 

with multiple diagnoses, those who are 

or have been involved in foster care, 

those involved in the justice system, 

and those who experience psychosis 

(GAO, 2008; Institute of Medicine 

[IOM], 2013). They also include those 

who reside in poverty and low service 

access communities, those who 

experience socioeconomic disadvantage, 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
21170 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

and those from underserved cultural 

communities (Alegria et al., 2010). 

Youth and young adults with SMHC 

face serious challenges to achieving 

successful employment outcomes, 

including challenges in completing 

postsecondary education or training 

(IOM, 2013; Woolsey & Katz-Leavy, 

2008), as well as challenges in 

community living and participation 

(Kaplan et al., 2012; Seo et al., 2013). 

One key to facing these challenges may 

be improved self-determination (Seo et 

al., 2013). Self-determination is a 

personal characteristic that leads 

individuals to make their own choices 

and decisions, to monitor and regulate 

their own actions and to be goaloriented and self-directing (National 

Gateway to Self-Determination, 

www.ngsd.org/everyone/what-selfdetermination). It is also reflected in 

SAMHSA’s definition of recovery from 

mental disorders (SAMHSA, 2012b). 

Youth and young adults with SMHC 

are more likely to suffer negative 

outcomes in high school completion, 

short- and long-term unemployment, 

and other employment related variables 

(Bradley et al, 2008; Wagner et al., 

2005). For example, they are less likely 

than their peers with other disabilities 

(e.g., learning disabilities) to be 

employed, and have marked difficulty 

in maintaining employment. There is a 

need for evidence-based and effective 

interventions, systems, and policies 

designed to improve employment and 

employment-related outcomes for youth 

and young adults with SMHC. Because 

evidence suggests that the effectiveness 

of interventions depends on the age of 

the participant (Burke-Miller et al., 

2012), employment-related 

interventions should be 

developmentally appropriate for youth 

and young adults. 

In addition, because educational 

attainment is a consistent predictor of 

later employment achievements (BurkeMiller et al., 2012; Ellison, et al., 2008; 

Tsang et al., 2000) it is important to 

develop effective supports for academic 

success, retention, and post-secondary 

participation for youth and young adults 

with SMHC (Rogers, et al., 2010). 

As in the case for employment, there 

is a need for evidence-based and 

effective interventions, systems, and 

policies designed to improve 

community living and participation for 

youth and young adults with SMHC. 

This population is more likely than 

their peers without SMHC to have been 

involved with the justice system, to 

have defaulted on a financial obligation, 

and to be involved in a violent 

relationship (IOM, 2013; Newman et al., 

2011). In addition, youth and young 

adults with SMHC frequently encounter 

stigma in their community (Gulliver et 

al., 2010; Walker, 2010), and experience 

challenges in the area of social skills 

(Wagner et al., 2005). As a result of the 

challenges associated with SMHC, 

youth and young adults with SMHC are 

frequently at a disadvantage in 

establishing the relationships and 

connections that contribute to 

community living and participation 

(Kaplan et al., 2012). 

Improving employment and 

community living and participation 

outcomes for youth and young adults 

depends not just on improvements in 

interventions and services but also on 

improvements in policies and systems 

established to deliver those 

interventions and services. Such 

improvements might include increased 

coordination across types of services, 

increased coordination between the 

child and adult mental health system, 

and increasing the developmental 

appropriateness of services for young 

adults in adult systems (GAO, 2008, 

2012; Osgood et al., 2010; Plotner et al., 

2012; Pottick et al., 2007). 

In sum, youth and young adults with 

SMHC frequently experience challenges 

in employment and in community 

living and participation. There is a need 

for more evidence-based and effective 

interventions, systems change and 

coordination, and policies to improve 

outcomes in these areas for these 

individuals, particularly those who face 

the greatest challenges. 

References 

Alegria, M., Vallas, M., & Pumariega, A. 

(2010). Racial and ethnic disparities in 

pediatric mental health. Child and 

Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North 

America, 19(4), 759. 

Bradley, R., Dootlittle, J., & Bartolotta, R. 

(2008). Building on the data and adding 

to the discussion: The experiences and 

outcomes of students with emotional 

disturbance. Journal of Behavioral 

Education, 17 (1), 4–23. 

Burke-Miller, J., Razzano, L. A., Grey, D. D., 

Blyler, C. R., & Cook, J. A. (2012). 

Supported employment outcomes for 

transition age youth and young adults. 

Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 35, 

171–179. 

Ellison, M. L., Russinova, Z., Lyass, A., & 

Rogers, E. S. (2008). Professionals and 

managers with severe mental illnesses: 

Findings from a national survey. The 

Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 

196(3), 179–189. 

Gulliver, A., Griffiths, K. M., & Christensen, 

H. (2010). Perceived barriers and 

facilitators to mental health help-seeking 

in young people: A systematic review. 

BMC Psychiatry, 10, 113–121. 

Institute of Medicine (2013). Improving the 

health, safety, and well-being of young 

adults: Workshop summary. Washington, 

DC: National Academies Press. 

Kaplan, K., Salzer, M. S., & Brusilovskly, E. 

(2012). Community participation as a 

predictor of recovery-oriented outcomes 

among emerging and mature adults with 

mental illnesses. Psychiatric 

Rehabilitation Journal, 35, 219–229. 

Kessler, R. C., Avenevoli, S., Costello, J., 

Green, J. G., Gruber, M. J., McLaughlin, 

K. A., Petukova, M., Sampson, N. A., 

Zaslavsky, A. M., & Merikangas, K. R. 

(2012). Severity of 12-month DSM–IV 

disorders in the National Comorbidity 

Survey Replication Adolescent 

Supplement. Archives of General 

Psychiatry, 69, 381–389. 

Newman, L., Wagner, M., Knokey, A., 

Marder, C., Nagle, K., Shaver, D., & Wei, 

X. (2011). The post-high school 

outcomes of young adults with 

disabilities up to 8 years after high 

school: A report from the National 

Longitudinal Transition Study 2 

(NLTS2). NCSER2011–3005. National 

Center for Special Education Research. 

Osgood, D. W., Foster, E. M., & Courtney, M. 

E. (2010). Vulnerable populations and 

the transition to adulthood. The Future 

of Children, 20(1), 209–229. 

Plotner, A. J., Trach, J. S., & Strauser, D. 

(2012). Vocational rehabilitation 

counselors’ identified transition 

competencies. Rehabilitation Counseling 

Bulletin, 55, 135–143. 

Pottick, K. J., Bilder, S., Vander Stoep, A., 

Warner, L. A., & Alvarez, M. F. (2007). 

US patterns of mental health service 

utilization for transition-age youth and 

young adults. Journal of Behavioral 

Health Services & Research, 35, 373–389. 

Rogers, E. S., Kash-Macdonald, M., Bruker, 

D., & Maru, M. (2010). Systematic review 

of supported education literature, 1989– 

2009. Boston, MA: Boston University, 

Sargent College, Center for Psychiatric 

Rehabilitation. 

Seo, H., Wehmeyer, M. L., Palmer, S. B., & 

Little, T. D. (2013). A two-group 

confirmatory factor analysis of The Arc’s 

Self-Determination Scale with students 

with emotional/behavioral disorders or 

learning disabilities. Journal of 

Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. 

Advanced online 

publication.doi:10.1177/

1063426613503496. 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services. (2012a). 

2010–2011 National Survey on Drug Use 

and Health-Model Based Estimates (50 

states and the District of Columbia). 

Retrieved from: www.samhsa.gov/data/

NSDUH/2k11State/

NSDUHsaeTables2011.pdf. 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services (2012b). 

SAMHSA’s working definition of 

recovery updated. Retrieved from: 

blog.samhsa.gov/2012/03/23/defintionof-recovery-updated. 

Tsang, H., Lam, P., Ng, B., & Leung, O. 

(2000). Predictors of employment 

outcome for people with psychiatric 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 21171 

disabilities: A review of literature since 

the mid80s. Journal of Rehabilitation, 

66(2), 19–31. 

U.S. General Accountability Office (June, 

2008). Young adults with serious mental 

illness: Some states and federal agencies 

are taking steps to address their 

transition challenges. GAO–08–678. 

U.S. General Accountability Office (July, 

2012). Students with disabilities: Better 

Federal coordination could lessen 

challenges in the transition from high 

school. GAO–12–594. 

Wagner, M., Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A., 

Epstein, M., & Sumi, W. (2005). The 

children and Youth We Serve A National 

Picture of the Characteristics of Students 

with Emotional disturbances Receiving 

Special Education. Journal of emotional 

and behavior disorders, 13(2), 79–96. 

Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Garza, 

N., & Levine, P. (2005). After high 

school: A first look at the postschool 

experiences of youth with disabilities. A 

report from the National Longitudinal 

Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Retrieved 

from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/

ED494935.pdf. 

Walker, J. S. (2010). Children’s stigmatization 

of peers with common emotional and 

behavioral disorders. Emotional & 

Behavioral Disorders in Youth, 10(2), 

44–51. 

Woolsey, L., & Katz-Leavy, J. (2008). 

Transitioning youth with mental health 

needs to meaningful employment and 

independent living. Washington, DC: 

National Collaborative on Workforce and 

Disability. 

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 

May 7, 2013 (78 FR 26513). 

(i) 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; 

(ii) 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 intervention study. 

Results from this stage of research may 

be used to inform the design of a study 

to test the efficacy of an intervention; 

(iii) 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; and 

(iv) 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 Priorities 

Proposed Priority 1—Transition to 

Employment for Youth and Young 

Adults With Serious Mental Health 

Conditions 

The Acting Assistant Secretary for 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services proposes a priority for a 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Center (RRTC) on Transition to 

Employment for Youth and Young 

Adults with Serious Mental Health 

Conditions (SMHC). This RRTC must 

conduct research that contributes to 

improved employment outcomes (e.g., 

obtaining employment, retention, and 

earnings) and employment-related 

outcomes (e.g., postsecondary 

education, training and career 

development activities) for youth and 

young adults with SMHC. 

For purposes of this priority, the term 

‘‘youth and young adults with SMHC’’ 

refers to individuals between the ages of 

14 and 30, inclusive, who have been 

diagnosed either with a serious 

emotional disturbance (for individuals 

under the age of 18 years) or a serious 

mental illness (for those 18 years of age 

or older). Under this priority, the RRTC 

must contribute to the following 

outcomes: 

(a) More effective and 

developmentally appropriate 

interventions that improve employment 

outcomes and increase capacity to use 

self-determination skills and strategies 

for youth and young adults with SMHC. 

The RRTC must contribute to this 

outcome by: 

(i) Identifying or developing, and then 

evaluating, innovative interventions that 

meet the needs of youth and young 

adults with SMHC; 

(ii) Involving youth and young adults 

with SMHC, and their families or family 

surrogates, in the processes of 

identifying or developing, and then 

evaluating interventions; and 

(iii) Including youth and young adults 

with SMHC who are at particular risk 

for less favorable employment 

outcomes, (e.g., unemployment and 

difficulty maintaining employment). 

Applicants must identify the specific atrisk group or groups of youth and young 

adults with SMHC they propose to 

study, provide evidence that the 

selected population or populations are 

at risk for poor employment outcomes, 

and explain how the proposed practices 

are expected to address the needs of the 

identified population. 

(b) Increased knowledge about 

workforce participation of youth and 

young adults with SMHC, as well as the 

service systems and evidence-based 

supported practices that enhance 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
21172 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

positive educational and vocational 

development. In generating this new 

knowledge, applicants should identify 

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 specified. 

(These research stages and their 

definitions are provided in the 

Definitions section of this notice.) 

(c) Increased capacity of 

organizations, State agencies, and other 

service providers for youth and young 

adults with SMHC to improve their 

educational and employment outcomes. 

The RRTC will provide training and 

technical assistance to service providers 

who work with youth and young adults 

with SMHC. 

(d) New knowledge regarding changes 

in systems and policies that could 

improve education, career development, 

and employment for youth and young 

adults with SMHC. 

(e) Serving as a national resource 

center to: 

(i) Provide information and technical 

assistance to youth and young adults 

with SMHC and their representatives, 

and other key stakeholders; 

(ii) Provide training (including 

graduate, pre-service, and in-service 

training) and technical assistance to 

vocational rehabilitation providers and 

other disability service providers to 

facilitate more effective delivery of 

services to youth and young adults with 

SMHC. This training may be provided 

through conferences, workshops, public 

education programs, in-service training 

programs, and similar activities; 

(iii) Disseminate research-based 

information and materials related to 

employment of youth and young adults 

with SMHC; and 

(iv) Involve key stakeholder groups in 

the activities conducted under 

paragraph (a) in order to maximize the 

relevance and usability of the new 

knowledge generated by the RRTC. 

Priority 2—Community Living and 

Participation for Youth and Young 

Adults With Serious Mental Health 

Conditions 

The Acting Assistant Secretary for 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services proposes a priority for a 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Center (RRTC) on Community Living 

and Participation of Youth and Young 

Adults with Serious Mental Health 

Conditions (SMHC). This RRTC must 

conduct research that contributes to 

improved community participation for 

youth and young adults with SMHC. 

For purposes of this priority, the term 

‘‘youth and young adults with SMHC’’ 

refers to individuals between the ages of 

14 and 30, inclusive, who have been 

diagnosed either with serious emotional 

disturbance (for individuals under the 

age of 18 years) or a serious mental 

illness (for those 18 years of age or 

older). Under this priority, the RRTC 

must contribute to the following 

outcomes: 

(a) More effective and 

developmentally appropriate 

interventions that improve community 

living and participation outcomes and 

increase capacity to use selfdeterminations skills and strategies for 

youth and young adults with SMHC. 

The RRTC must contribute to this 

outcome by: 

(i) Identifying or developing and then 

evaluating innovative interventions that 

meet the needs of youth and young 

adults with SMHC; 

(ii) Involving youth and young adults 

with SMHC, and their families or family 

surrogates, in the processes of 

identifying or developing and then 

evaluating interventions; and 

(iii) Ensuring that samples include 

youth and young adults with SMHC 

who are at particular risk for less 

favorable community living and 

participation outcomes, including, but 

not limited to those with justice system 

involvement, those in foster care, and 

those with multiple diagnoses. 

Applicants must identify the specific atrisk group or groups of youth and young 

adults with SMHC they propose to 

study, provide evidence that the 

selected population or populations are 

at risk for less favorable community 

living and participation outcomes, and 

explain how the proposed practices are 

expected to address the needs of the 

identified population. 

(b) Increased capacity of organizations 

and service providers for youth and 

young adults with SMHC to promote the 

social and self-determination skills of 

youth and young adults with SMHC and 

help them build connections with 

positive individuals and organizations 

in their communities. The RRTC will 

provide training and technical 

assistance to service providers who 

work with youth and young adults with 

SMHC. 

(c) New knowledge about key systems 

and policy issues that influence 

decisions about eligibility, effectiveness, 

structure, implementation and funding 

for programs and initiatives that support 

community living and participation and 

self-determination in youth and young 

adults with SMHC. In generating this 

new knowledge, applicants should 

identify 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 specified. (These research stages 

and their definitions are provided in the 

Definitions section of this notice.) 

(d) Serving as a national resource 

center related to community 

participation and self-determination of 

youth and young adults with SMHC by: 

(i) Providing information and 

technical assistance to youth and young 

adults with SMHC and their 

representatives, and other key 

stakeholders; 

(ii) Providing training (including 

graduate, pre-service, and in-service 

training) and technical assistance 

service providers, to facilitate more 

effective delivery of services to youth 

and young adults with SMHC. This 

training may be provided through 

conferences, workshops, public 

education programs, in-service training 

programs, and similar activities; 

(iii) Disseminating research-based 

information and materials related to 

community living and participation and 

self-determination of youth and young 

adults with SMHC; and 

(iv) Involving key stakeholder groups 

in the activities conducted under 

paragraph (a) in order to maximize the 

relevance and usability of the new 

knowledge generated by the RRTC. 

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)). 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 21173 

Final Priorities 

We will announce the final priorities 

in a notice in the Federal Register. We 

will determine the final priorities 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 one or more of these priorities, 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 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 these proposed 

priorities only upon a reasoned 

determination that their benefits would 

justify their 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 these proposed priorities 

are 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 the RRTCs have been 

completed successfully, and the 

proposed priorities will generate new 

knowledge through research. The new 

RRTCs will generate, disseminate, and 

promote the use of new information that 

would improve outcomes for 

individuals with disabilities in the areas 

of community living and participation, 

employment, and health and function. 

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 10, 2014. 

Michael K. Yudin, 

Acting Assistant, Secretary for Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2014–08556 Filed 4–14–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0649; FRL–9909–59– 

Region–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Section 110(a)(2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1