[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 19, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36667-36671]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14652]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Chapter III

[CFDA Number: 84.133E-3.]


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

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, 
Department of Education.

ACTION: Final priority.

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

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 
Rehabilitative Services announces a priority for a Rehabilitation 
Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Technologies to Support 
Successful Aging with Disability under the Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by 
the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research 
(NIDRR). 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 outcomes for individuals with 
disabilities.

DATES: Effective Date: This priority is effective July 19, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marlene Spencer, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 5133, Potomac Center Plaza 
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2700. Telephone: (202) 245-7532 or by 
email: [email protected].
    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: 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 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 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.
    We published a proposed priority for this program in the Federal 
Register on April 3, 2013 (78 FR 20069). That notice contained 
background information and our reasons for proposing the particular 
priority.
    Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the notice of 
proposed priority, nine parties submitted comments on the proposed 
priority. Generally, we do not address technical and other minor 
changes or suggested changes the law does not authorize us to make 
under the applicable statutory authority. In addition, we generally do 
not address comments that raise concerns not directly related to the 
proposed priority.
    Analysis of Comments and Changes: An analysis of the comments and 
changes in the priority since publication

[[Page 36668]]

of the notice of proposed priority follows.
    Comment: Four commenters requested that NIDRR modify the priority 
to emphasize the importance of multidisciplinary teams and to require 
the use of such teams to achieve the RERC's intended outcomes. One of 
these commenters specifically described the importance of including 
engineers, psychologists, research methodologists with expertise in 
experiments, and health and medical professionals on the RERC staff.
    Discussion: NIDRR does not typically specify or require staffing 
patterns or approaches in its priorities. Instead, we ask our peer 
reviewers to assess the quality of the proposed staff relative to the 
activities the applicant proposes to conduct. Specifically, we ask 
reviewers to assess ``the extent to which the key personnel and other 
key staff have appropriate training and experience in disciplines 
required to conduct all proposed activities'' (34 CFR 350.54(n)(3)(i)).
    Changes: None.
    Comment: Four commenters noted that the priority's focus on home-
based technologies may not be broad enough to promote physical and 
cognitive functioning of individuals aging with long-term disabilities. 
These commenters requested that NIDRR expand the priority's focus 
beyond ``home-based'' technologies to include ``community-based'' 
technologies as well.
    Discussion: NIDRR agrees with the commenters. By requiring research 
and development on home-based technologies to improve outcomes of 
individuals with disabilities as they age, we primarily intended to 
signify that we were requiring the RERC to conduct work on technologies 
that are intended for use outside of the clinical setting. We did not 
intend to preclude work on technologies that have applications in the 
community.
    Changes: We have revised the priority by changing ``home-based'' to 
``home- and community-based.''
    Comment: Three commenters requested that NIDRR modify paragraph (4) 
in General RERC Requirements to specify that ``universal design'' 
requires smart technologies that personalize their features through 
dynamic interaction with the user. Another commenter suggested that 
NIDRR modify this paragraph by requiring ``flexibility of technology 
use'' for a wide variety of target populations and environments.
    Discussion: NIDRR does not agree that further specificity in the 
principles of universal design is needed. The requirement and 
definition are purposefully broad, which allows applicants to apply 
universal design approaches to a wide variety of existing and emerging 
technologies, environments or settings, and target populations to 
address a broad range of access barriers. NIDRR does not want to 
overemphasize one particular application or interpretation of universal 
design principles. It is up to applicants to describe how the 
technologies that are the focus of their proposed research and 
development activities meet this universal design requirement. The peer 
review process will determine the merits of each proposal.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter requested that NIDRR modify the priority to 
require engagement of a wide variety of stakeholders in the RERC's work 
in order to promote adoption of new technologies in the area of aging 
with a disability. This commenter also requested that NIDRR modify the 
priority to require engagement of stakeholders in developing, testing, 
evaluating, and disseminating the RERC's work. This commenter noted 
that it will be particularly important to engage older individuals in 
the RERC's work (including individuals aging with disabilities and 
older service providers) to address their relative lack of experience 
with technology.
    Discussion: NIDRR agrees that engagement and collaboration with 
stakeholders is important to realizing the RERC's intended outcomes. 
NIDRR believes that the priority, which requires collaboration and 
communication with relevant stakeholders to promote access to and use 
of technologies to improve outcomes of individuals with disabilities as 
they age, sufficiently addresses the commenter's points. In addition, 
in the third and fifth numbered paragraphs of General RERC 
Requirements, NIDRR requires collaboration with a wide variety of 
stakeholders to increase research capacity in the area of 
rehabilitation engineering related to aging with a disability and to 
increase awareness and understanding of cutting-edge developments in 
this area. In the third bulleted paragraph of General RERC 
Requirements, NIDRR also requires applicants to propose and implement a 
plan for including individuals with disabilities or their 
representatives in all aspects of the RERC's work. In the context of 
this priority, this requirement refers to the inclusion of individuals 
who are aging with long-term disabilities.
    Nothing in the priority precludes applicants from proposing to 
engage with older service providers to help address any lack of 
familiarity with technology, as suggested by the commenter. However, we 
do not have a sufficient basis for requiring all applicants to do so. 
In response to the requirements related to stakeholder involvement, 
applicants must propose appropriate collaborations with the goal of 
contributing to the intended outcomes of the RERC. The peer review 
process will determine the merits of each application.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that NIDRR modify the priority 
to require the RERC to educate the ``community at large'' on how to 
work with and accommodate individuals with disabilities as they age.
    Discussion: It is beyond the scope of this RERC priority to educate 
the community at large on how to work with and accommodate individuals 
with disabilities as they age. Such a broadly stated requirement would 
necessitate activities that go well beyond the research, development, 
and related activities that are central to this RERC's work. Instead, 
this priority requires targeted collaboration with, and inclusion of, 
relevant stakeholders in all aspects of the RERC's work.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter noted that the priority allows applicants to 
develop and evaluate new technologies or evaluate existing or 
commercially available technologies, or both. This commenter 
recommended that NIDRR modify the priority to require the development 
of new technologies, given the current limitations of commercially 
available technologies. This commenter also suggested that NIDRR modify 
the priority to include the possibility of ``blending'' commercially 
available technologies with technology developed by the RERC.
    Discussion: Nothing in the priority precludes applicants from 
focusing their research and development activities on the development 
of new technologies or on developing new technologies and ``blending'' 
them with commercially available technologies. We do not want to 
preclude proposals from applicants who choose to evaluate existing or 
commercially available technologies only. The peer review process will 
determine the merits of each proposal.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the evidence base for 
technologies can only be built within specific disability groups and 
not for ``all persons with disabilities.'' This

[[Page 36669]]

commenter recommended that NIDRR modify the priority so that it 
requires applicants to specify the disability group to which the RERC's 
research and development work will apply.
    Discussion: NIDRR generally agrees that it is important for 
applicants to specify the target population for their proposed research 
and development work. At the same time, applicants can propose multiple 
or broad target populations, and we do not want to preclude applicants 
from proposing research and development toward technologies with broad 
application. As part of the selection criteria that are used to 
evaluate RERC applications, we ask reviewers to assess ``the extent to 
which the applicant clearly describes the need and target population'' 
(34 CFR 350.54(a)(2)(i)). The peer review process will determine the 
merits of each application.
    Changes: None.
    Final Priority:
    Background:
    This final priority is in concert with NIDRR's Long-Range Plan 
(Plan) for Fiscal Years 2013-2017. 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 improve the 
health and functioning, employment, and community living and 
participation of individuals with disabilities through comprehensive 
programs of research, engineering, training, technical assistance, and 
knowledge translation and dissemination. The Plan reflects NIDRR's 
commitment to quality, relevance, and balance in its programs to ensure 
appropriate attention to all aspects of well-being of individuals with 
disabilities and to all types and degrees of disability, including low-
incidence and severe disabilities.
    Priority--RERC on Technologies to Support Successful Aging with 
Disability.
    The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services proposes the following priority for the establishment of a 
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Technologies to 
Support Successful Aging With Disability. Within its designated 
priority research area, this RERC will focus on innovative 
technological solutions, new knowledge, and new concepts that will 
improve the lives of individuals with disabilities.
    Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop or identify, 
and evaluate innovative technologies and strategies that maximize the 
physical and cognitive functioning of individuals with long-term 
disabilities as they age. This RERC must engage in research and 
development activities to build a base of evidence for the usability 
of, and cost-effectiveness of home- and community-based interactive 
technologies that are intended to improve physical and cognitive 
functioning of individuals with disabilities as they age. This RERC may 
develop and evaluate new technologies, or identify and evaluate 
existing or commercially available technologies, or both, that are 
designed to improve the physical and cognitive outcomes of this 
population. In addition, the RERC must facilitate access to, and use of 
the low-cost, home- and community-based interactive technologies that 
improve the physical and cognitive outcomes of individuals with 
disabilities, through such means as collaborating and communicating 
with relevant stakeholders, providing technical assistance, and 
promoting technology transfer.

General RERC Requirements

    Under this priority, the RERC must be designed to contribute to the 
following outcomes:
    (1) Increased technical and scientific knowledge relevant to its 
designated priority research area. The RERC must contribute to this 
outcome by conducting high-quality, rigorous research and development 
projects.
    (2) Increased innovation in technologies, products, environments, 
performance guidelines, and monitoring and assessment tools applicable 
to its designated priority research area. The RERC must contribute to 
this outcome through the development and testing of these innovations.
    (3) Improved research capacity in its designated priority research 
area. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by collaborating with 
the relevant industry, professional associations, institutions of 
higher education, health care providers, or educators, as appropriate.
    (4) Improved usability and accessibility of products and 
environments in the RERC's designated priority research area. The RERC 
must contribute to this outcome by emphasizing the principles of 
universal design in its product research and development. For purposes 
of this section, the term ``universal design'' refers to the design of 
products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest 
extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design.
    (5) Improved awareness and understanding of cutting-edge 
developments in technologies within its designated priority research 
area. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by identifying and 
communicating with relevant stakeholders, including NIDRR; individuals 
with disabilities and their representatives; disability organizations; 
service providers; professional journals; manufacturers; and other 
interested parties regarding trends and evolving product concepts 
related to its designated priority research area.
    (6) Increased impact of research in the designated priority 
research area. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by providing 
technical assistance to relevant public and private organizations, 
individuals with disabilities, employers, and schools on policies, 
guidelines, and standards related to its designated priority research 
area.
    (7) Increased transfer of RERC-developed technologies to the 
marketplace. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by developing and 
implementing a plan for ensuring that all technologies developed by the 
RERC are made available to the public. The technology transfer plan 
must be developed in the first year of the project period in 
consultation with the NIDRR-funded Disability Rehabilitation Research 
Project, Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer.
    In addition, the RERC must--
     Have the capability to design, build, and test prototype 
devices and assist in the technology transfer and knowledge translation 
of successful solutions to relevant production and service delivery 
settings;
     Evaluate the efficacy and safety of its new products, 
instrumentation, or assistive devices;
     Provide as part of its proposal, and then implement, a 
plan that describes how it will include, as appropriate, individuals 
with disabilities or their representatives in all phases of its 
activities, including research, development, training, dissemination, 
and evaluation;
     Provide as part of its proposal, and then implement, a 
plan to disseminate its research results to individuals with 
disabilities and their representatives; disability organizations; 
service providers; professional journals; manufacturers; and other 
interested parties. In meeting this requirement, each RERC may use a 
variety of mechanisms to disseminate information, including state-of-
the-science conferences, webinars, Web sites, and other dissemination 
methods; and

[[Page 36670]]

     Coordinate with relevant NIDRR-funded projects, as 
identified through consultation with the NIDRR project officer.
    Types of Priorities:
    When inviting applications for a competition using one or more 
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute, 
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal 
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
    Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only 
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
    Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference 
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1) 
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the 
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) 
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of 
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
    Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are 
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority. 
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a 
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
    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 final 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 final 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 final 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 regulatory action is consistent with the 
principles in Executive Order 13563.
    We also have determined that this regulatory action does 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, as 
projects similar to the one envisioned by the final priority have been 
completed successfully. Establishing a new RERC based on the final 
priority will generate new knowledge through research and development 
and improve the lives of individuals with disabilities. The new RERC 
will generate, disseminate, and promote the use of new information that 
will improve the options for individuals with disabilities to fully 
participate in their communities.
    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.


[[Page 36671]]


    Dated: June 14, 2013.
Michael K. Yudin,
Delegated the authority to perform the functions and the duties of the 
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2013-14652 Filed 6-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P