[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 222 (Friday, November 18, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-28479]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: November 18, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Department of Education





_______________________________________________________________________



Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; National 
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Notice
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

 

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of final funding priorities for fiscal years 1995-1996 
for rehabilitation engineering research centers.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Secretary announces final funding priorities for new 
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) under the National 
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) for fiscal 
years 1995-1996. The Secretary takes this action to focus research 
attention on areas of national need. These priorities are intended to 
improve rehabilitation services and outcomes for individuals with 
disabilities.

EFFECTIVE DATE: These priorities take effect on December 19, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Esquith, U.S. Department of 
Education, 600 Independence Avenue, SW., Switzer Building, Room 3424, 
Washington, DC 20202-2601. Telephone: (202) 205-8801. Individuals who 
use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the TDD 
number at (202) 205-5516.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice contains three final priorities 
under the RERC program for research on children with orthopedic 
impairments, research on low vision and blindness, and research on 
universal telecommunications access.
    Authority for the RERC program of NIDRR is contained in section 
204(b)(3) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 760-
762). Under this program the Secretary makes awards to public and 
private agencies and organizations, including institutions of higher 
education, Indian tribes, and tribal organizations, to conduct 
research, demonstration, and training activities regarding 
rehabilitation technology in order to enhance opportunities for meeting 
the needs of, and addressing the barriers confronted by, individuals 
with disabilities in all aspects of their lives. An RERC must be 
operated by or in collaboration with an institution of higher education 
or a nonprofit organization.
    These final priorities support the National Education Goals that 
call for all children in America to start school ready to learn and for 
every adult American to possess the skills necessary to compete in a 
global economy.
    Under the regulations for this program (see 34 CFR 353.32) the 
Secretary may establish research priorities by reserving funds to 
support particular research activities.
    On August 25, 1994, the Secretary published a notice of proposed 
priorities in the Federal Register (59 FR 44010).
    The Department of Education received 50 letters commenting on the 
proposed priorities. A number of modifications have been made to the 
priorities as a result of those comments. The comments, and the 
Secretary's responses, are discussed in an appendix to this notice.

    Note: This notice of final priorities does not solicit 
applications. A notice inviting applications under these 
competitions is published in a separate notice in this issue of the 
Federal Register.

Description of the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center Program

    RERCs carry out research or demonstration activities by: (1) 
Developing and disseminating innovative methods of applying advanced 
technology, scientific achievement, and psychological and social 
knowledge to (a) solve rehabilitation problems and remove environmental 
barriers, and (b) study new or emerging technologies, products, or 
environments; (2) demonstrating and disseminating (a) innovative models 
for the delivery of cost-effective rehabilitation technology services 
to rural and urban areas, and (b) other scientific research to assist 
in meeting the employment and independent living needs of individuals 
with severe disabilities; or (3) facilitating service delivery systems 
change through (a) the development, evaluation, and dissemination of 
consumer-responsive and individual and family centered innovative 
models for the delivery to both rural and urban areas of innovative 
cost-effective rehabilitation technology services, and (b) other 
scientific research to assist in meeting the employment and independent 
needs of individuals with severe disabilities.
    The statute requires that each applicant for a grant, including an 
RERC, demonstrate how its proposed activities address the needs of 
individuals from minority backgrounds who have disabilities. Each RERC 
must provide training opportunities to individuals, including 
individuals with disabilities, to become researchers of rehabilitation 
technology and practitioners of rehabilitation technology in 
conjunction with institutions of higher education and nonprofit 
organizations.

General

    The following requirements apply to the RERCs pursuant to these 
absolute priorities unless noted otherwise:
    Each applicant for an RERC must describe the coordination 
activities it will undertake with public and private entities 
conducting similar research activities in order to avoid duplication of 
effort and enhance its research activities.
    The RERC (except the RERC on universal telecommunications access) 
must have a laboratory and the capability to design, build, and test 
prototype devices and assist in the transfer of successful solutions to 
the marketplace. The RERC must evaluate the efficacy and safety of its 
new products, instrumentation, or assistive devices.
    The RERC must provide graduate-level research training to build 
capacity for engineering research in the rehabilitation field and to 
provide training in the applications of new technology to service 
providers and to individuals with disabilities and their families.
    The RERC must develop all training materials in formats that will 
be accessible to individuals with various types of disabilities and 
communication modes, and widely disseminate findings and products to 
individuals with disabilities and their families and representatives, 
service providers, manufacturers and distributors, and other 
appropriate target populations.
    The RERC must involve individuals with disabilities, persons from 
minority backgrounds with disabilities and, if appropriate, their 
family members in planning and implementing the research, development, 
and training programs, in interpreting and disseminating the research 
findings, and in evaluating the Center.
    The RERC must share information and data, and, as appropriate, 
collaborate on research and training with other NIDRR-supported 
grantees including, but not limited to, the Americans with Disabilities 
Act (ADA) Disability and Business Technical Assistance Centers and 
other related RERCs and RRTCs. The RERC must work closely with the RERC 
on Technology Evaluation and Transfer at the State University of New 
York at Buffalo.

Priority

    Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) the Secretary gives an absolute 
preference to applications that meet the following priorities. The 
Secretary will fund under this competition only applications that meet 
these absolute priorities.

Priority 1: Technology for Children With Orthopedic Disabilities

Background

    Children who sustain traumatic injury, congenital anomalies or 
disease-induced anomalies may require prosthetic devices for missing 
limbs and orthotic devices for support and correction. Because children 
are growing rapidly, their prosthetic and orthotic devices must be 
designed to satisfy their special developmental needs. Too often, 
children's devices are scaled-down versions of adult devices.
    New composite materials such as graphite, carbon fiber/carbon 
matrix, and fiber-reinforced ceramics have much to offer in prosthetic 
and orthotic design and practice because they are lightweight and 
durable. These factors are especially important for young children. 
However, composite materials require different manufacturing techniques 
than those used to form metals. The special configurations of these 
devices require special construction methods to produce devices that 
are safe and effective and competitively priced. In addition, most 
composite materials are hard to re-shape once they are made. This 
interferes with the fitting of devices that need to be adjusted for 
each child. Techniques for adjusting the shape of composite material 
devices need to be developed.
    The neuromuscular and musculoskeletal development of growing 
children presents a significant challenge to those practitioners who 
provide children with prosthetic and orthotic devices. The devices must 
meet the prevailing needs of the child as well as adjust to the child's 
physical growth for a reasonably long period of time.
    Most orthotic/prosthetic facilities have difficulty meeting these 
challenges. This is compounded by the fact that children who need these 
services are not evenly distributed throughout the country, and there 
are few service providers in some geographic areas. In addition, some 
practitioners and parents have limited access to a variety of devices. 
As a result, they are not in a position to sample a number of devices 
and select the one that is most appropriate. For example, the electric 
hand often appeals to a parent because it looks and acts like a real 
hand. An experimental fitting and practical comparison may persuade 
parents and child that the benefits of hook design outweigh the 
cosmetic appeal of the electric hand. Inexpensive opportunities to try 
out various prostheses need to be increased.

Priority

    An RERC on technology for children with orthopedic disabilities 
shall--
     Develop and evaluate prosthetic and orthotic devices 
(e.g., spinal orthotics as they relate to seating; upper limb and 
cervical orthotics as they relate to body positioning for head and arm 
control; and braces and crutches) and related orthopedic procedures to 
meet the changing needs of growing children with neuromuscular and 
musculoskeletal impairments;
     Identify and assess the suitability of materials for use 
in these devices, including composite materials, considering the 
weight, strength, durability, adaptability, techniques of fabrication, 
cost and cosmetic acceptability;
     Develop improved methods for fabricating assistive devices 
for children, including those using composite materials;
     Evaluate the effectiveness of the systems of delivery of 
prosthetic and orthotic devices and closely related assistive 
technology to children with orthopedic impairments and develop 
recommendations to improve the current systems;
     Identify, develop, and evaluate models to enable children 
and families, as well as clinicians, to test prosthetic and orthotic 
devices for suitability prior to purchase;
     Identify the unique barriers to effective service delivery 
for prosthetic and orthotic devices facing families of children with 
orthopedic disabilities from minority backgrounds and develop 
strategies for overcoming those barriers; and
     Develop and implement strategies to increase the 
participation of children with orthopedic impairments and their parents 
in identifying user needs for prosthetic and orthotic devices and 
future areas of research.

Priority 2: Technology for Low Vision and Blindness

Background
    The National Center for Health Statistics and other authorities 
variously estimate the number of legally blind persons in the United 
States at 400,000 to 600,000, with another 1.4 million persons severely 
visually impaired. More than 10 million others have some visual 
impairment that cannot be further improved with corrective lenses. 
There are also large and rapidly increasing numbers of older 
individuals with impairments in contrast, binocularity, and adaptation, 
which significantly limit their performance in a wide variety of 
everyday tasks.
    Technological innovations arising from the development of new 
scientific and medical knowledge can have a positive impact on the 
lives of persons with low vision or blindness. While progress has been 
made regarding educational and vocational aids, optical amplifiers for 
low vision, orientation and mobility aids, and improved functional 
vision assessment, the need remains for improvements in these areas. 
For example, there is a need for new and innovative adaptive devices 
and development of systems engineering solutions to assist in our 
efforts to prepare all children with low vision and blindness to enter 
school ready to learn through early identification, monitoring, and 
treatment of visual impairments in neonates and infants.
    A report of the Technology Research Working Group stemming from the 
NIDRR Project Directors Meeting in January 1994, identified the need 
for technology to improve access to visual displays, including flat 
panel displays and devices that use liquid crystal displays with low 
contrast. Research is also needed to maintain access to new products 
with advancing technology used in the home, workplace, and the 
community, such as solid state displays, keypads, and compact disc 
technology.
    Vision-related research is needed to provide access to public 
facilities and mass transit. One of the main problems for persons who 
are blind or visually impaired is locating the facility in question 
(e.g., the bus stop, the subway entrance, ticket vending machine, 
telephone, bathrooms, etc.), or for orientation and mobility in large 
open areas or closed crowded spaces. New techniques for orientation and 
mobility will increase independent mobility for persons with blindness 
and low vision and decrease dependance on others for information and 
assistance. There is also a need to research, develop, and evaluate new 
and adaptive technology for persons with deaf-blindness, including 
tactile communications for devices such as emergency alarms, doorbells, 
and TDD phones.
    Captioning technology and systems have been developed to provide 
audio information in visual form for persons who are deaf. A need 
exists for these same types of technology and systems to provide visual 
information in audio form for persons who are blind. As technology 
becomes increasingly graphic in nature, especially with the 
proliferation of computer-generated imagery, persons who are blind or 
who have low vision are increasingly at risk of being denied access to 
communication formats that are high in graphic content.
    The feasibility of descriptive video has been investigated 
(Technical Viability of Descriptive Video Services, June 1990, prepared 
for U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education 
Programs). A need exists to advance this technology in order to 
increase utilization of descriptive video by persons with low vision 
and blindness.

Priority

    An RERC on technology for low vision and blindness shall--
     Develop technology and methods for the detection, 
monitoring, and diagnosis of visual impairments in neonates and 
infants;
     Develop technology and methods, including map reading, for 
orientation and mobility in large open areas such as transportation 
facilities, crossroads, shopping malls, parks, and areas of public 
assembly and display;
     Develop reduced-cost engineering solutions for increasing 
utilization of descriptive video;
     Develop technology and methods for improving access to 
visual displays, including flat panel displays (e.g., develop an 
adaptive template overlay technology for flat panel displays), found in 
the home, in the community, and at work such as automatic teller 
machines, home appliances, stereo equipment, and other devices that use 
LCD and LED technologies;
     Develop technology for persons with low vision or 
blindness, including those persons who are elderly as well as persons 
who have cognitive disabilities, to maintain access to new products 
with advancing technology used in the home, workplace, and the 
community, such as solid state displays, keypads, and compact disc 
technology;
     Develop technology, such as emergency alarms, doorbells, 
and TDD phones for persons with deaf-blindness and for persons with low 
vision or blindness who are elderly or have multiple sensory, cognitive 
or physical impairments, to assist them in their activities of daily 
living;
     Develop technology and methods for improving access by 
persons with low vision or blindness to electronic information systems; 
and
     Develop an engineering design review method for 
application to proposed new technology projects that first considers 
commercially available or universal design interfaces before developing 
orphan technology for individuals with low vision and blindness.

Priority 3: Universal Telecommunications Access

Background

    Generally speaking, individuals with communication disabilities are 
those with a hearing, vision, speech, or neurological impairment, or a 
combination of such impairments. This priority proposes a program of 
research to promote greater access to emerging telecommunications 
technology by individuals who have communication disabilities, 
including persons with limited cognitive abilities.
    The coming decade is likely to bring advances in the way people 
communicate over distances. Access to greater bandwidth in the 
telephone network will lead to new advances, new devices and new 
services, such as switched video, TV-phones, or voice-to-print (Hinton, 
OSEP Final Report, ``Advanced Technologies for Benefit to Persons with 
Sensory Disabilities,'' 1992). Already low-cost facsimile technology, 
answering machines, and voice mail are changing office communications. 
Computer-based information services abound, and telephones themselves 
are no longer standard. Persons with speech impairments are 
increasingly at a disadvantage with voice recognition and voice mail 
telecommunication systems because they are designed for standard speech 
which is clear, well-articulated, and melodic. The employment status, 
social, and family life of persons with disabilities could be affected 
by their access to advances in telecommunications.
    The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires private 
employers, State and local governments, employment agencies, labor 
unions, and joint labor-management committees to provide reasonable 
accommodations to qualified individuals with disabilities, including 
those with communication disabilities. The ADA also requires State and 
local governments and public accommodations to make auxiliary aids and 
services available where necessary to ensure effective communication.
    Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, requires 
the Secretary, through the Director of the National Institute on 
Disability and Rehabilitation Research, and the Administrator of the 
General Services Administration, to ``develop and establish guidelines 
for Federal agencies for electronic and information technology 
accessibility designed to ensure, regardless of the type of medium, 
that individuals with disabilities can produce information and data, 
and have access to information and data, comparable to the information 
and data, and access, respectively, of individuals who are not 
individuals with disabilities.'' Section 508 also provides that the 
guidelines ``shall be revised, as necessary, to reflect technological 
advances or changes.''
    Past efforts in opening up developing technology to include access 
for persons with communication disabilities have been retrospective 
rather than prospective. Too frequently telecommunications technologies 
are developed and become widely used before consumers who have 
communication disabilities become aware of the barriers they 
inadvertently contain. There is a need to affect the development of 
telecommunications technology, regulations, and standards in order to 
promote the incorporation of universal design features. Furthermore, 
there is a need to communicate information routinely to appropriate 
researchers, manufacturers, and other major contributors to 
communication technology that will contribute to the development of 
accessible telecommunications devices and systems. The need for special 
customer-premised equipment will be reduced when international 
standards include features that make general-market products accessible 
to persons with communications disabilities.
    Technological advances in the field of telecommunications, both in 
this country and internationally, have the potential to represent 
either new opportunities to disabled people or new barriers. This 
proposed RERC shall work closely with developers and manufacturers to 
enhance awareness of how emerging telecommunications developments can 
be modified to incorporate features that are directly responsive to the 
special needs of individuals with communication disabilities.
    Applicants for this priority must demonstrate knowledge of the 
history and present roles of various Government agencies in 
telecommunications and electronic equipment accessibility, such as 
NIDRR, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), the General 
Services Administration (GSA), the Federal Communications Commission 
(FCC), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology (NIST), and the National Telecommunications 
Information Administration (NTIA). Applicants must also demonstrate a 
knowledge of other NIDRR-funded programs studying issues of persons 
with communications impairments as well as related information 
databases, private national and international organizations, such as 
the United States Telephone Association and the Telecommunications 
Industries Association and the International Telecommunication Union's 
Technology unit (ITU-T).

Priority

    An RERC on universal telecommunications access shall--
     Undertake a systems engineering analysis of emerging 
telecommunications technology (such as signal compression, analog to 
digital systems transitions, satellite transmission, development of a 
national information infrastructure, telecommunity living, voice-to-
print, Mosaic and Windows multimedia interfaces, etc.) to identify 
potential technological barriers and marketplace disincentives for 
persons with communication disabilities, and, based on these analyses, 
identify and develop universal design strategies, that can be used by 
both persons with disabilities and able-bodied persons, to avoid these 
barriers;
     Develop an engineering design review methodology for 
dissemination to designers that encourages universal access designs in 
the development of technology;
     Develop or evaluate innovative applications of 
telecommunication technology to enable individuals with disabilities to 
be more independent at home, in the community, and at work, including, 
but not limited to, voice mail, videophones, cellular phones, 
descriptive video, speech clarification, etc;
     Identify and develop accessible design characteristics for 
telecommunications technology and services and provide appropriate 
industries and agencies with the results of this research;
     Develop engineering test methods and labeling requirements 
to facilitate development of improved technical specifications to 
enhance accessibility in equipment, services, signaling, transmission, 
and other aspects of telecommunications, with immediate emphasis on 
improving relay devices and cooperating with agencies responsible for 
national and international and other industry group standards;
     Develop model training programs and materials on the use 
and capacities of new and emerging telecommunications technologies; and
     In the second year of the grant, investigate applications 
of telecommunications technology to improve access to mainstream 
educational programming for students with disabilities, especially 
students in economically disadvantaged areas.

    Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR Parts 350 and 353.

    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760-762.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 84.133E, 
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers).

    Dated: November 10, 1994.
Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.

Appendix

Analysis of Comments and Changes

    By the deadline date, the Department received 50 comments in 
response to the proposed priorities. Thirteen additional comments 
were received after the deadline date and were not considered in 
this response. Most of the commenters were generally supportive of 
the proposed priority, but many made suggestions for modifications. 
This Appendix contains an analysis of the comments and the changes 
in the priority since the publication of the notice of proposed 
priority. Technical and other minor changes--and suggested changes 
the Secretary is not legally authorized to make under applicable 
statutory authority--are not addressed.

Priority 1: Technology for Children With Orthopedic Disabilities

    Comment: One commenter recommended expanding the priority to 
include spinal orthotics as they relate to seating and upper-limb 
and cervical orthotics as they relate to body positioning for head 
and arm control.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that the commenter's 
recommendations are examples of the types of research authorized by 
the first activity of the priority.
    Changes: The commenter's examples and other examples of 
orthotic-related activities have been added to the first activity of 
the priority.
    Comment: One commenter recommended expanding the priority to 
address educational technology.
    Discussion: The Secretary does not believe it is appropriate to 
expand the priority because educational technology is addressed 
through the Technology, Educational Media, and Materials for 
Individuals with Disabilities Program and Research in Education of 
Individuals with Disabilities Program administered by the Office of 
Special Education Programs.
    Changes: None.

Priority 2: Technology for Low Vision and Blindness

    Comment: Many commenters recommended adding specific emphases 
and activities to the priority.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that applicants should have 
the discretion to propose any emphasis or activity that is 
authorized by the priority. The application review process will 
determine the merits of the emphasis or activity that an applicant 
proposes. The Secretary believes that the commenters' 
recommendations listed directly below are authorized by the priority 
and may be proposed by an applicant. However, the Secretary declines 
to require all applicants to address them. These recommended 
emphases and activities are as follows: Develop tools and 
technologies that promote employment and independent living; address 
artificial vision, image recognition, and vocalization; emphasize 
technologies for low vision; emphasize approaches that are 
compatible with each other and/or which provide an integrated 
solution to the full range of orientation problems; address 
wayfinding systems that rely heavily on the provision of labels; and 
emphasize natural speech to access products with advancing 
technology and for accessing electronic information systems.
    In addition, the Secretary believes that the following 
recommended activities are authorized by the priority, but may not 
be feasible because of the limited resources available to the RERC: 
Expand the activity on developing reduced cost engineering solutions 
for descriptive videos to all assistive technology and services used 
by persons with low vision or blindness; develop better electro-
optical devices and visual field wideners for persons with retinitis 
pigmentosa and better visual aids for persons with macular 
degeneration; improve Microsoft Windows environment to work better 
with screen reader technology; address interoperability of visual 
displays and graphic user interfaces being developed for 
applications in such areas as home appliances, information kiosks, 
and video access systems for public telephones; develop access to 
graphical user interface operating systems;
    The Secretary believes that the following commenters' 
recommendations are not authorized by the priority because the 
activity is incompatible with purpose of the RERC: Conduct a 
technology needs assessment of the entire blind and visually 
impaired populations; address educational technology; address 
methods and technologies to facilitate detection and 
characterization of remedial visual disabilities; assess the 
strengths and weaknesses of current technology; develop methods and 
technologies to train individuals in the optimal use of residual 
vision, enhancement techniques, and vision substitution techniques; 
and provide spatial orientation training.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended revising the priority to 
address the needs of persons with cognitive disabilities.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees the RERC should address the 
needs of persons with low vision or blindness who also have 
cognitive disabilities.
    Changes: The fifth activity of the priority has been revised to 
require the RERC to address the needs of persons with cognitive 
disabilities when it develops technology to maintain access to new 
products with advancing technology used in the home, workplace, and 
the community.
    Comment: Many commenters recommended revising the priority to 
address the unique needs of persons who are elderly.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the RERC should address 
the unique needs of persons who are elderly with low vision or 
blindness. The Secretary believes that the RERC should address these 
needs in carrying out the fifth and sixth activities of the 
priority.
    Changes: The fifth and sixth activities of the priority have 
been revised to emphasize persons who are elderly.
    Comment: Many commenters recommended that the RERC address 
issues related to transportation. Three commenters recommended 
revising the priority to deal with improving orientation and 
mobility aids in surface transportation vehicles and facilities. 
Five commenters recommended that transit issues be addressed in the 
second activity of the priority involving orientation and mobility 
in ``large open areas.'' One commenter recommended adding an 
activity to address issues surrounding audible traffic signals and 
an activity to provide directional information at crossroads.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that transportation issues of 
orientation and mobility for persons with low vision or blindness 
are important. The Secretary believes that clarification is 
necessary to ensure that applicants have the discretion to address 
transportation issues under the second activity of the priority.
    Changes: The second activity of the priority has been revised to 
clarify that transportation facilities and crossroads may be 
considered ``large open areas'' for the purposes of the second 
activity of the priority.
    Comment: Five commenters asked for clarification regarding the 
meaning of phrase ``large open areas'' in the second activity.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that clarification of the 
phrase ``large open areas'' will assist applicants to address the 
second activity of the priority.
    Changes: Examples of large open areas have been added to the 
second activity of the priority.
    Comment: Four commenters recommended placing less emphasis on 
descriptive videos because of OSEP's descriptive video activities.
    Discussion: The descriptive videos activities of OSEP do not 
involve the development of reduced-cost engineering solutions to 
increase utilization. The Secretary believes that the RERC's 
activities related to descriptive videos will complement, not 
duplicate, the activities that OSEP is undertaking.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: Three commenters recommended that the RERC address the 
needs of rural, economically disadvantaged, and minority 
populations.
    Discussion: The Secretary expects RERCs to address the needs of 
rural, economically disadvantaged, and minority populations. The 
statute requires all applicants for a grant to demonstrate how its 
proposed activities will address the needs of individuals from 
minority backgrounds. It also requires all RERCs to demonstrate and 
disseminate innovative models for the delivery of cost-effective 
rehabilitation technology services to rural and urban areas. The 
Secretary does not believe any further requirements are necessary.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: Four commenters recommended expanding the priority to 
address visual impairment and hearing loss beyond the provisions 
regarding persons with deaf-blindness in the sixth activity of the 
priority. Another commenter recommended that the sixth activity be 
expanded to include persons with multiple sensory, cognitive, and 
physical impairments.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that it would be appropriate 
and feasible to expand the sixth activity to address the needs of 
persons with low vision or blindness and a hearing loss, as well as 
persons with multiple sensory, cognitive, and physical impairments.
    Changes: The sixth activity of the priority has been revised to 
include persons with low vision or blindness and a hearing loss, as 
well as persons with multiple sensory, cognitive, and physical 
impairments.
    Comment: One commenter questioned the National Center for Health 
Statistics' estimate of the number of legally blind persons and 
severely visually impaired persons in the United States cited in the 
Background to the priority.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes these data are accurate.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter noted that the technology developed by 
the RERC may also address the needs for cuing and multiple input 
needed by persons with other disabilities than low vision or 
blindness.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the technology developed 
by the RERC may also address the needs of persons with other 
disabilities. The Secretary believes that the eighth activity of the 
priority regarding commercially available or universal design 
interfaces will promote the applicability of the RERC's work to 
persons with disabilities other than low vision or blindness.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: Four commenters recommended requiring that the RERC 
coordinate its research activities with specific public and private 
entities conducting research in the same field.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that every RERC should 
coordinate its research activities with public and private entities 
conducting research in the same field in order to avoid duplication 
and enhance the quality of its research activities. The Secretary 
declines to identify each of these public and private entities in 
the priority. However, the Secretary believes that each applicant 
for an RERC should describe the coordination activities it will 
undertake with public and private entities conducting similar 
research activities.
    Changes: A general requirement has been added, applicable to all 
RERCs, requiring each applicant to describe the coordination 
activities it will undertake with public and private entities 
conducting similar research activities in order to avoid duplication 
and enhance the quality of its research activities.

Priority 3: Universal Telecommunications Access

    Comment: One comment recommended expanding the priority to 
include specific adaptions and research (e.g., memory assists, 
signing simplification, and the adaption of software) for persons 
with limited cognitive ability.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees the RERC should address the 
needs of persons with limited cognitive abilities who experience 
communication disabilities. The Secretary believes that applicants 
should have the discretion to propose specific research activities.
    Changes: The Background to the priority has been revised to 
include persons with limited cognitive abilities as part of the 
target population of the RERC.
    Comment: One commenter asked whether, for the purposes of the 
priority, the phrase ``universal design'' meant ``to have similar 
design standards and strategies and to require the same mode of 
input and capability,'' or ``to design for all people regardless of 
disability or capability.''
    The same commenter also asked for clarification regarding the 
terms, ``signaling, transmission, and relay devices'' in fifth 
activity of the priority.
    Discussion: The Secretary notes that in its absolute priority 
establishing the RERC on Accessibility and Universal Design in 
Housing (see 58 FR 60097), NIDRR referred to ``universal design'' 
technology as enhancing the lives of all people and being usable 
both by individuals with disabilities and able-bodied persons. The 
Secretary believes that the comment's latter definition of universal 
design approximates NIDRR's meaning.
    Regarding the commenter's request regarding the fifth activity 
of the priority, the Secretary points out that the fifth activity is 
intended to enhance the current telephone relay system used by 
persons who are deaf.
    Changes: The first activity of the priority has been revised to 
clarify that the RERC will identify and develop universal design 
strategies that can be used by both persons with disabilities and 
able-bodied persons.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the priority include a 
broad perspective on what constitutes a communication disability, 
focus on employment as goal of the priority, and emphasize diverse 
environments, especially worksites.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that the commenter's 
recommendations are authorized by the priority and may be proposed 
by an applicant. The Secretary believes that applicants should have 
the discretion to propose any emphasis or activity that is 
authorized by the priority. The application review process will 
determine the merits of each proposal. However, the Secretary 
declines to require all applicants to address the commenter's 
recommendations.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended expanding the priority to add 
the development of an engineering review method for ensuring 
accessibility and interoperability of communications networks. 
Another commenter recommended that the RERC assess the 
interoperability of cable and broadcast television, telephone, 
radiowave, and network services.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that the commenters' 
recommendations are authorized by the priority, but may not be 
feasible because of the limited resources available to the RERC.
    Changes: None.

General Comments

    Comment: Nine commenters recommended providing authority to the 
RERC to undertake laboratory development of customized devices.
    Discussion: The Secretary recognizes that one of the incidental 
benefits of RERC research has been the laboratory development of 
customized devices. The Secretary believes that it is important to 
clarify that this authority continues to exist. The Secretary also 
notes that while the RERC on Universal Telecommunications Access is 
not required to have a laboratory and the capability to design, 
build, and test prototype devices and assist in the transfer of 
successful solutions to the marketplace, applicants may propose such 
activities.
    Changes: The general requirements of the priorities have been 
revised to clarify that the RERC on Children with Orthopedic 
Impairments and the RERC on Low Vision and Blindness must have a 
laboratory to undertake development of devices.
    Comment: One commenter recommended requiring that all of the 
RERCs undertake and complete a systems engineering analysis of the 
factors understood to be the priority.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that the commenter's 
recommendation is authorized by each of the priorities and may be 
proposed by an applicant. The Secretary believes that applicants 
should have the discretion to propose any emphasis or activity that 
is authorized by the priority. The application review process will 
determine the merits of each proposal. However, the Secretary 
declines to require all applicants to address the commenter's 
recommendations.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended a new priority for the 
demonstration of rehabilitation technology activities related to 
early childhood, including early intervention and family support.
    Discussion: The Secretary will consider the commenter's 
recommendation when new priorities are being developed.
    Changes: None.

[FR Doc. 94-28479 Filed 11-17-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P