```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 12 (Thursday, January 17, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3864-3867]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00939]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Chapter III

Proposed Priority--National Institute on Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research--Disability and Rehabilitation Research 
Projects and Centers Program--Rehabilitation Engineering Research 
Centers

CFDA Number: 84.133E-1.

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 
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs): Hearing 
Enhancement. The Assistant Secretary may use this priority for a 
competition 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 February 19, 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 
currently approved Long-Range Plan (Plan). The Plan, which was 
published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2006 (71 FR 8165), 
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 awards for 
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 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 Order 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 5140, 550 12th Street SW., PCP, 
Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4 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

[[Page 3865]]

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 self-sufficiency 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.
    Hearing Enhancement.
    Background: Approximately 34.2 million Americans have a hearing 
impairment (Kochkin, 2009). An untreated hearing impairment has 
profound implications for people across the lifespan (e.g., in 
education, school-to-work transition, employment, community 
participation, and general social and emotional well-being) (Pallarito, 
2010; Kochkin, 2010b; Chisolm et al., 2007a).
    Research and development related to hearing enhancement 
technologies has produced advances in areas related to digital and 
wireless hearing aids, assistive technologies, cochlear and middle ear 
implants, and aural rehabilitation, but many research and development 
needs remain (Fellinger et al., 2012; Stender, 2011; Groth and 
Anthonsen, 2010; Kochkin, 2010a; Chisolm et al., 2007b; Sweetow and 
Sabes, 2007; Pirzanski, 2006). For example, research has indicated that 
while 95 percent of people with a hearing impairment can benefit from 
hearing aids, only 23 percent actually use them (Kochkin, 2007). Among 
the many reasons for not using hearing aids are characteristics of the 
hearing aids themselves (e.g., the hearing aids are uncomfortable and 
unreliable, do not work well in noisy environments, and do not work 
seamlessly across multiple settings and technologies) (Kochkin, 2010a; 
Kochkin, 2007). Assistive listening devices (e.g., FM systems, infrared 
systems, and audio induction loop systems) still have significant 
limitations related to portability, usability, and performance, 
particularly during group discussions (Harkins and Tucker, 2007). More 
research and development is needed on cochlear and middle ear implants 
to determine and optimize performance and benefits in real-life 
situations (Peterson et al., 2010; Rameh et al., 2010).
    Successful hearing enhancement technologies have been demonstrated 
to improve the quality of life for people with hearing impairments 
(Fellinger et al., 2012; Kochkin, 2010b; Chisolm et al., 2007a, 2007b). 
Accordingly, NIDRR seeks to fund an RERC to address problems that 
prevent the use of, or reduce the use and benefit of, hearing 
enhancement technologies, and to optimize options for people with 
hearing impairments.
    References:

Chisolm, T.H., Johnson, C.E., Danhaer, J.L., Portz, L.J.P, Abrams, 
H.B., Lesner, S., McCarthy, P.A., and Newman, C.W. (2007a). A 
systematic review of health-related quality of life and hearing 
aids: Final report of the American Academy of Audiology Task Force 
on the Health-Related Quality of Life Benefits of Amplification in 
Adults. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 18: 151-183.
Chisolm, T.H., Noe, C.M., McArdle, R., and Abrams, H. (2007b). 
Evidence for the use of hearing assistive technology by adults: The 
role of the FM system. Trends in Amplification, 11(2): 73-89.
Fellinger, J., Holzinger, D., and Pollard, R. (2012). Mental health 
of deaf people. The Lancet, 379: 1037-1044.
Groth, J., and Anthonsen, F. (2010). Fewer wires, less complexity, 
and more connections: The new challenge for wireless hearing 
instruments. Hearing Review, 17(6): 28-36.
Harkins, J., and Tucker, P. (2007). An internet survey of 
individuals with hearing loss regarding assistive listening devices. 
Trends in Amplification, 11(2): 91-100.
Kochkin, S. (2010a). MarkeTrak VIII: Consumer satisfaction with 
hearing aids is slowly increasing. Hearing Journal, 63(1): 19-24.
Kochkin, S. (2010b). MarkeTrak VIII: The efficacy of hearing aids in 
achieving compensation equity in the workplace. Hearing Journal, 
63(10): 19-26.
Kochkin, S. (2009). MarkeTrak VIII: 25-year trends in the hearing 
health market. Hearing Review, 16 (11): 12-31.
Kochkin, S. (2007). MarkeTrak VII: Obstacles to adult non-user 
adoption of hearing aids. Hearing Journal, 60(4): 27-43.
Pallarito, K. (2010). Teach patients who hear ``well enough'' the 
real cost of neglecting hearing loss. Hearing Journal, 63(8): 19-25.
Peterson, N.R., Pisoni, D.B., & Miyamoto, R.T. (2010). Cochlear 
implants and spoken language processing abilities: Review and 
assessment of the literature. Medicine, Clinical Neurology and 
Exercise & Occupational Therapy, 28(2).
Pirzanski, C. (2006, August). Earmolds and hearing aid shells: A 
tutorial part 4: BTE styles, materials, and acoustic modifications. 
Hearing Review.
Rameh, C., Meller, R., Lavielle, J., Deveze, A., and Magnan, J. 
(2010). Long-term patient satisfaction with different middle ear 
implants in sensorineural hearing loss. Ontology & Neurotology, 
31(6): 883-892.
Stender, T. (2011). Phone and TV solutions for better hearing. 
Hearing Review, 18(10): 24-30.
Sweetow, R.W., and Sabes, J.S. (2007). Technologic advances in aural 
rehabilitation: Applications and innovative methods of service 
delivery. Trends in Amplification, 11(2): 101-111.

    Proposed Priority:
    The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services proposes the following priority for the establishment of a 
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Hearing 
Enhancement. The RERC must focus on innovative technological solutions, 
new knowledge, and concepts that will improve the lives of individuals 
with disabilities.
    Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate 
technologies, methods, and systems that will improve the accessibility, 
usability, and performance of hearing enhancement technologies (e.g., 
hearing aids, ear molds, assistive listening devices, and implants) for 
people with hearing loss, including but not limited to people with 
untreated hearing loss. This includes: (a) Addressing technological 
factors that prevent or reduce adoption of and benefit from hearing 
enhancement devices (e.g., hearing aid and implant design features, ear 
mold fit and comfort, and assistive listening devices and technologies 
for

[[Page 3866]]

group settings); (b) improving the compatibility of hearing enhancement 
technologies with other technologies such as cell phones, mobile 
devices, television, and the Internet; (c) improving the performance of 
hearing enhancement devices in social environments (e.g., school, work, 
recreation, and entertainment); and (d) enhancing aural rehabilitation 
and consumer involvement strategies (e.g., online access to peer and 
expert input on hearing technologies and communication strategies; 
consumer focus groups and surveys; and consumer beta testing and review 
of products) to maximize hearing enhancement in real-life settings. The 
RERC must involve key stakeholders (including but not limited to people 
with hearing loss) in the design and implementation of RERC activities.
    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 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 
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

[[Page 3867]]

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: January 14, 2013.
Michael Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services.
[FR Doc. 2013-00939 Filed 1-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
```