[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 120 (Monday, June 23, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35502-35507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14387]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Parts 369 and 371
[Docket ID ED-2013-OSERS-0083]
RIN 1820-AB66
Vocational Rehabilitation Services Projects for American Indians
With Disabilities
AGENCY: Rehabilitation Services Administration, Office of Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services, Department of Education (RSA).
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Secretary proposes to amend the definition of
``reservation'' under the regulations governing the American Indian
Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS) program in one of two ways.
The first proposed amendment, ``Alternative A,'' would conform the
definition to the Department's current interpretation and practices. In
order to be eligible for a grant, a federally or State recognized tribe
must be located on a Federal or State reservation. The statutory
definition of ``reservation'' includes Federal or State Indian
reservations; public domain Indian allotments; former Indian
reservations in Oklahoma; and land held by incorporated Native groups,
regional corporations, and village corporations under the provisions of
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. The Department's ``Alternative
A'' definition would also include as a reservation ``defined areas of
land recognized by a State or the Federal Government where there is a
concentration of tribal members and on which the tribal government is
providing structured activities and services.''
The second proposed amendment to the regulatory definition of
``reservation,'' ``Alternative B,'' would limit the areas of land the
Department considers to be reservations to those that are listed in the
statutory definition of ``reservation'': Federal or State Indian
reservations; public domain Indian allotments; former Indian
reservations in Oklahoma; or land held by incorporated Native groups,
regional corporations, and village corporations under the provisions of
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.
The Secretary seeks comment on both alternatives.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before August 22, 2014.
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 Thomas Finch, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue
SW., Room 5147 Potomac Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2800.
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: Thomas Finch, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5147, Potomac Center Plaza
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2800. Telephone: (202) 245-7343, 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:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
these proposed regulations. Specifically, we invite comments from
tribal officials, tribal governments, tribal organizations, affected
tribal members, State vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies, VR
counselors, and all other concerned parties.
We also 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 regulations. 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 Department's programs
and activities.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about these proposed regulations by accessing Regulations.gov.
You may also inspect the comments in person in room 5147 Potomac Center
Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2800, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
Washington, DC time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal
holidays. Please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
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 these proposed regulations. 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.
Background
Under section 121(a) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended
(the Rehabilitation Act) (29 U.S.C. 741(a)), the RSA Commissioner may
make grants to the governing bodies of Indian tribes located on Federal
and
[[Page 35503]]
State reservations (and consortia of such governing bodies) to pay 90
percent of the costs of VR services for American Indians who are
individuals with disabilities residing on or near such reservations.
The purpose of the program is for the tribes to provide VR services to
these individuals so that they can prepare for and engage in gainful
employment.
Section 121(c) of the Rehabilitation Act defines the term
``reservation'' as: ``The term `reservation' includes Indian
reservations, public domain Indian allotments, and former Indian
reservations in Oklahoma, and land held by incorporated Native groups,
regional corporations, and village corporations under the provisions of
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.'' The current regulatory
definition of ``reservation'' under the AIVRS program at 34 CFR
371.4(b) is similar: ``Reservation means a Federal or State Indian
reservation, public domain Indian allotment, former Indian reservation
in Oklahoma, and land held by incorporated Native groups, regional
corporations and village corporations under the provisions of the
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.''
The Department currently interprets the term ``includes'' in the
statutory definition of ``reservation'' to mean that the list of land
areas in the statute is not exhaustive. As a result, the Department
considers other land areas that it determines are consistent with both
the purpose of the program and the list of land areas provided in the
statute to be within the meaning of ``reservation.'' Thus, the
Department's longstanding interpretation of the statute is that tribes
that are located on a defined and contiguous (i.e. attached, bordering,
adjacent) area of land where there is a concentration of tribal members
and on which the tribal government is providing structured activities
and services meet the statutory definition of ``reservation.''
From FY 2007 through FY 2011, five grantees, serving six tribes,
were awarded AIVRS grants using the Department's long-standing
interpretation of ``reservation.'' In FY 2013, these grantees provided
services to 559 American Indians with disabilities. The Department has
received no complaints about the grantees' eligibility at any time
during the life of these grants.
We are proposing Alternative A because the current definition of
``reservation'' in Sec. 371.4(b) does not clearly reflect our
statutory interpretation. The Department seeks comment on the amended
definition in Alternative A that would make its current interpretation
explicit.
The proposed Alternative B definition of ``reservation'' arises out
of a May 9, 2012, U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report,
``Federal Funding for Non-Federally Recognized Tribes,'' GAO-12-348
(available at www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-348). The report questions
whether the Department's interpretation of ``reservation'' is broader
than the term's statutory definition.
Specifically, the GAO questioned the Department's view that a
State-recognized tribe is eligible for AIVRS program grants when it is
not located on a State reservation but on a defined area of land where
there is a concentration of tribal members and on which the tribal
government is providing structured activities and services--described
in the tribal service area outlined in a tribe's grant application. The
Department provided comments on the GAO's draft report supporting its
current practice. The GAO, in its final report, recommended that the
Secretary review the eligibility requirements for AIVRS grants and take
appropriate action.
The Department has done so, and here continues to consider how best
to interpret the statute in light of the purposes of the program. The
Department is therefore also seeking comment on a proposed definition
of ``reservation'' that limits eligibility to tribes located only on
those areas of land specifically identified in the statutory
definition--Alternative B. This proposed change would align the
Department's interpretation of ``reservation'' in the AIVRS program
with that of the GAO.
In considering these alternative definitions of ``reservation'' in
the AIVRS program, we have consulted internally, as well as with
officials of other Federal government agencies. In addition, as
required by Executive Order 13175, the Department consulted tribal
officials, tribal governments, tribal organizations, and affected
tribal members regarding this matter. The tribal consultation conducted
by the Department is described further in the Tribal Summary Impact
Statement section of this notice.
Finally, the same definition of ``reservation'' found in 34 CFR
371.4(b) is included in 34 CFR 369.4(b), the regulations governing
special project activities, including the AIVRS program, that provide
vocational rehabilitation services. We therefore propose conforming
amendments to 34 CFR 369.4.
Summary of Proposed Changes
The proposed regulation in Alternative A would amend Sec. 371.4(b)
to reflect the Department's current interpretation and practices.
Tribes eligible for AIVRS grants would continue to be those located on
land specifically identified in the statute, as well as those located
on a defined area of land recognized by a State or the Federal
Government where there is a concentration of tribal members and on
which the tribal government is providing structured activities and
services.
In refining our current interpretation in these proposed
regulations, we have removed the requirement that the tribal lands be
contiguous and added the requirement that they be recognized by a State
or the Federal Government. While in the past, many of the tribal lands
of tribes that received grants under our current interpretation have
been contiguous, we have determined that requiring the lands to be
contiguous is not essential to be considered a ``reservation'' for the
purposes of the AIVRS program. We believe that, in order to have
similar characteristics to a reservation, the tribal lands must be
located on a defined area of land recognized by a State or the Federal
Government where there is a concentration of tribal members and on
which the tribal government is providing structured activities and
services. We understand that some tribal lands so recognized are not
necessarily contiguous.
The proposed regulation in Alternative B would limit eligibility to
tribes located only on those areas of land specifically identified in
the statutory definition. Statute: Section 121(a) of the Rehabilitation
Act authorizes the RSA Commissioner to ``make grants to the governing
bodies of Indian tribes located on Federal and State reservations (and
consortia of such governing bodies) to pay 90 percent of the costs of
vocational rehabilitation services for American Indians who are
individuals with disabilities residing on or near such reservations.''
Section 121(c) of the Rehabilitation Act defines the term
``reservation'' as: ``The term `reservation' includes Indian
reservations, public domain Indian allotments, former Indian
reservations in Oklahoma, and land held by incorporated Native groups,
regional corporations, and village corporations under the provisions of
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.''
Current Regulations: Section 371.2 of the current regulations
implementing section 121 of the Rehabilitation Act
[[Page 35504]]
provides that applications may be made only by the governing bodies of
Indian tribes and consortia of those governing bodies located on
Federal and State reservations. Current Sec. 371.4(b) defines
``reservation'' as ``a Federal or State Indian reservation, public
domain Indian allotment, former Indian reservation in Oklahoma, and
land held by incorporated Native groups, regional corporations and
village corporations under the provisions of the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act.''
Proposed Regulations: Under proposed Alternative A, we would amend
current Sec. 371.4 to reflect more clearly the Department's current
eligibility determination practices and interpretation of
``reservation.'' Specifically, we would amend the definition of
``reservation'' to include ``a defined area of land recognized by a
State or the Federal Government where there is a concentration of
tribal members and on which the tribal government is providing
structured activities and services.'' This definition would include
lands identified in the U.S. Census as a State-designated tribal
statistical area or a tribal-designated statistical area and lands
designated as tribal service areas by statute, judicial decision, or
administrative determination.
Under proposed Alternative B, we would amend current Sec. 371.4 to
state that only those land areas specifically listed in the statutory
definition of ``reservation'' qualify as a reservation. Consequently,
under Sec. 371.2, only those tribes that are located on land areas
that are listed under the definition of ``reservation'' would be
eligible to apply for a grant under the AIVRS program. This alternative
would constitute a change in the Department's interpretation such that
federally recognized tribes without Federal reservations, State
recognized tribes without State reservations, or other areas of land
not specifically listed in the statutory definition of ``reservation''
would not be eligible to apply for grants under the AIVRS program.
Reasons: The Department is proposing two alternative regulatory
interpretations of the statutory definition of ``reservation'' in the
AIVRS program because we believe that the statute is capable of these
different interpretations, and we are seeking public comment on both of
them, including their policy ramifications, to inform our decision.
The statutory definition of ``reservation'' specifically includes
land areas that meet the requirements for a reservation (past or
present). Use of the term ``includes'' in the definition, however,
indicates that the list need not be exhaustive. Proposed Alternative A
areas of land would be identified by the Federal or State Government as
discrete areas of land in which tribes provide governmental services to
their members, although they do not share all of the characteristics of
the areas of land listed in the statute.
For example, tribal land areas proposed as ``reservations'' in
Alternative A are identified by States (in the case of State-designated
tribal statistical areas) or by federally recognized Indian tribes (in
the case of tribal designated statistical areas) and are accepted by
the U.S. Census Bureau, which recognizes them as compact and contiguous
areas of land that contain a concentration of people who identify with
the tribe and in which there is structured or organized tribal
activity. Other service areas that would be covered by proposed
Alternative A are defined by State or Federal statute. See, e.g., the
Ponca Restoration Act, which establishes a service area for members of
the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska in various counties in Nebraska, Iowa, and
South Dakota. 25 U.S.C. 983c. Still other areas identified by judicial
decision or administrative determination could be covered. Please refer
to the discussion of proposed Alternative B below to understand how the
characteristics of these types of land areas differ from the land areas
specified in the statute.
Arguably, including these areas of land in addition to those listed
in the statute furthers the purpose of the AIVRS program, which the
Department administers with the goal of assisting tribes to provide
vocational rehabilitation services in a culturally sensitive manner to
as many American Indians with disabilities as possible, resulting in
meaningful employment.
In proposed Alternative B, we are considering the interpretation
recommended by GAO in its report, that the list of land areas contained
in the statutory definition of ``reservation'' should be exclusive and
no other areas of land can be ``reservations'' under the AIVRS program.
There may be some support for such an interpretation in other Federal
statutes we have examined that authorize financial assistance to Indian
tribes and that have been interpreted to include the tribes whose
eligibility is at issue here. These statutes use language defining the
eligibility of tribes that is broader than the AIVRS governing statute
and that authorizes financial assistance to tribes with or without
reservations. These statutes use either the phrase ``including but not
limited to'' or explicitly include the authority to provide assistance,
for example, to Indian organizations or public or private nonprofit
agencies serving Indians. See, e.g., Native Americans Program Act of
1974, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and the Indian Health Care statute, 25 U.S.C.
1644(c).
The Department acknowledges that the areas of land it currently
accepts and proposes to include in Alternative A as ``reservations''
are not specifically identified in the statute and are distinguishable
in two respects. All of the statutorily specified land areas--
reservations, public domain Indian allotments, former Indian
reservations in Oklahoma, and land held by incorporated Native groups,
regional corporations, and village corporations under the provisions of
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act--are (or were) formally
recognized and set aside by the Federal or State government for use by
Indians and are (or were) subject to Federal or State supervision.
The additional areas of land proposed in Alternative A are not
located on reservations, or on any of the other areas listed in the
statute as reservations, and do not share these characteristics: They
are not set aside for Indians by the Federal or State government, and
neither the Federal nor State governments have oversight over them. One
reason for limiting AIVRS eligibility to only those tribes that have
reservations or other land areas listed in the statute, is to contain
the program to tribes that have a certain relationship with a State or
the Federal Government that the traditional reservation status implies.
Because we believe either interpretation is supportable, we propose
alternative regulations that would each clarify eligibility for the
program but have different consequences for affected tribes. We welcome
comment on both.
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
[[Page 35505]]
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 a significant regulatory action
subject to review by OMB under section 3(f)(4) of Executive Order
12866.
We have also reviewed these regulations 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 regulations only on a reasoned
determination that their benefits would justify their 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 these proposed regulations are
consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.
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 associated
with this regulatory action are those resulting from our interpretation
of statutory requirements and those we have determined are necessary
for administering the Department's programs and activities.
The amendment to the regulatory definition of ``reservation''
proposed in Alternative A would produce no change in costs or benefits
as it conforms the definition to the Department's current
interpretation and practices. The proposed change to ``reservation'' in
Alternative B would affect five current grantees (six tribes, as one
grantee is a consortium of two tribes) that currently receive funding
through the AIVRS program and at least 29 other federally or state-
recognized tribes that we have identified through census data. These
tribes would be significantly affected in that they would not be
eligible to apply for grants under the AIVRS program. Also
significantly affected would be the American Indians with disabilities
(559 in FY 2013) who would have sought VR services through these
tribes.
The obvious sources to continue to provide VR services to American
Indians with disabilities are the State VR programs. Section 121(b)(3)
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, requires States to
``provide vocational rehabilitation services under its State plan to
American Indians residing on or near a reservation whenever such State
includes any such American Indians in its State population under
section 110(a)(1).''
Of the six tribes that would be immediately affected by the change
in proposed Alternative B, two tribes are in Washington State, three
tribes are in Louisiana, and one tribe is in North Carolina.
Information obtained from discussions with State VR Directors suggests
that the State Division of Rehabilitation Services in Washington would
be able to serve consumers currently being served by the two AIVRS
grantees in that State, whereas Louisiana and North Carolina indicated
that they would not be able to absorb the large number of individuals
who would need to be served. In addition, Louisiana is under an order
of selection whereby it only serves individuals with the most severe or
significant disabilities. Therefore, it is unlikely that the current
121 consumers who do not have the most significant disabilities served
by that project would be able to receive VR services under an order of
selection.
On the other hand, because new grantees would replace the current
grantees and provide VR services to American Indians with disabilities
who need them in order to secure or maintain employment, the change
would primarily involve a shift of resources among projects. Thus,
there may not be a net effect in terms of the purpose of the program,
which is to serve and place American Indians with disabilities into
competitive employment.
In addition, the pool of eligible applicants for a grant under the
AIVRS program includes all federally- and State-recognized tribes that
are located on reservations as defined specifically by the statute.
This is a large majority of the tribes. Currently, RSA provides funds
to 85 tribal VR programs to provide VR services to American Indians
with disabilities; consequently, the pool of potential applicants is
still quite large, and the Department has information that eligible
tribes that have not previously applied for an AIVRS grant are
preparing to do so.
Under the capacity-building projects in section 21 of the
Rehabilitation Act, the Department awards grants to provide support to
traditionally underserved populations by conducting research, training,
technical assistance, or a related activity to improve services
provided under the Act. The grants included a project that conducted
grant-writing workshops for American Indian tribes. The Director of
this project indicated that, at a minimum, there are at least 12
eligible tribes that have attended the grant writing workshops that
have not previously submitted applications for this program, and the
tribes have expressed an intent to apply when the Department holds its
next competition.
In summary, proposed Alternative B would have a major effect on a
small number of current and future grantees. However, we would expect
to fund new grantees at the same level as the current grantees.
Therefore, the net effect of this proposed change is likely to be that
it will not have a noticeable effect on the number of American Indians
with disabilities served and placed in employment by the AIVRS program.
[[Page 35506]]
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum ``Plain
Language in Government Writing'' require each agency to write
regulations that are easy to understand.
The Secretary invites comments on how to make these proposed
regulations easier to understand, including answers to questions such
as the following:
Are the requirements in the proposed regulations clearly
stated?
Do the proposed regulations contain technical terms or
other wording that interferes with their clarity?
Does the format of the proposed regulations (grouping and
order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce
their clarity?
Would the proposed regulations be easier to understand if
we divided them into more (but shorter) sections? (A ``section'' is
preceded by the symbol ``Sec. '' and a numbered heading; for example,
Sec. 350.6.)
Could the description of the proposed regulations in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble be more helpful in
making the proposed regulations easier to understand? If so, how?
What else could we do to make the proposed regulations
easier to understand?
To send any comments that concern how the Department could make
these proposed regulations easier to understand, see the instructions
in the ADDRESSES section.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that these proposed regulations would not
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Applicants to RSA's AIVRS program are the governing bodies of Indian
tribes or consortia of such governing bodies located on Federal and
State reservations and are not considered small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed regulation does not contain any information
collection requirements.
Intergovernmental Review
This program is not subject to Executive Order 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
Tribal Summary Impact Statement
As the first step in soliciting feedback on a possible change in
the Department's interpretation of ``reservation'' under the AIVRS
program, and consistent with Executive Order 13175 entitled
``Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments,'' the
Department of Education published a Notice of Tribal Consultation and
Request for Comments in the Federal Register on July 5, 2013 (78 FR
40458). That notice sought input from tribal officials, tribal
governments, tribal organizations, and affected tribal members about a
possible change in the Department's interpretation of the term of
``reservation'' as that term is used in determining AIVRS program grant
eligibility.
The Department's request seeking input focused on three areas: (1)
The potential effect on limiting eligibility for AIVRS grants to those
Indian tribes (and consortia of tribes) located only on Federal and
State reservations and the other land areas specifically listed in the
statutory definition of ``reservation''; (2) for tribes that currently
provide services under this program and that would not meet the revised
interpretation of ``reservation,'' how the individuals receiving those
services would continue to receive vocational rehabilitation services
to help them in obtaining employment or returning to work; and (3) how
a revised interpretation of ``reservation'' might affect the pool of
potential applicants for the AIVRS program that have not previously
applied but may consider applying for an AIVRS grant.
The Department received a total of 72 comments in response to the
published notice, three of which did not respond directly to the areas
on which the Department focused. The 69 remaining comments supported
retaining the Department's current interpretation of ``reservation.''
With regard to the three specific areas on which the Department sought
comment, 58 commenters believed that limiting eligibility to only those
Indian tribes on Federal or State reservations as defined specifically
in the statute would result in a loss of services or the availability
of services to American Indians with disabilities; 25 commenters did
not believe that the State VR program is as well prepared as the AIVRS
projects to provide VR services, including traditional healing
services, in a way that would be culturally sensitive to tribal
consumers; and 11 commenters believed that a change to the
interpretation of ``reservation'' would reduce the pool of potential
applicants.
As a supplement to the Federal Register notice seeking input,
program officials from the Department also participated in two face-to-
face Tribal Consultation Listening Sessions that were held in August
(Smith River, California) and September (Scottsdale, Arizona) 2013. The
participants were asked to respond to the same three areas identified
in the Federal Register notice. The comments provided by participants
during these ``Listening Sessions,'' while much fewer in number, were
comparable to those received in response to the Federal Register notice
and were primarily from the same tribes that provided responses to the
notice. These commenters supported retaining the current interpretation
of ``reservation.'' They believed that, for those consumers receiving
services under the AIVRS program, such services would not continue
because tribal members would be reluctant to seek services from the
State VR agencies or the agencies' case load would not be able to
absorb them.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number
84.250.
List of Subjects
34 CFR Part 369
Grant programs--social programs, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Vocational rehabilitation.
34 CFR Part 371
Grant programs--Indians, Grant programs--social programs Indians,
Vocational rehabilitation.
Dated: June 16, 2014.
Michael K. Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Secretary proposes
to amend parts 369 and 371 of title 34 of
[[Page 35507]]
the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 369--VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION SERVICE PROJECTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 369 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 7011(c), 732, 750, 777(a)(1), 777b, 777f
and 795g, unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Section 369.4(b) is amended by revising the definition of
``Reservation'' to read as follows:
[Alternative A]
Sec. 369.4 What definitions apply to these programs?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
Reservation means a Federal or State Indian reservation; public
domain Indian allotment; former Indian reservation in Oklahoma; land
held by incorporated Native groups, regional corporations, and village
corporations under the provisions of the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act; or a defined area of land recognized by a State or the
Federal Government where there is a concentration of tribal members and
on which the tribal government is providing structured activities and
services.
* * * * *
[Alternative B]
Sec. 369.4 What definitions apply to this program?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
Reservation means only a Federal or State Indian reservation,
public domain Indian allotment, former Indian reservation in Oklahoma,
and land held by incorporated Native groups, regional corporations, and
village corporations under the provisions of the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act.
* * * * *
PART 371--VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION SERVICES PROJECTS FOR AMERICAN
INDIANS WITH DISABILITIES
0
3. The authority citation for part 371 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 709(c) and 741, unless otherwise noted.
0
4. Section 371.4(b) is amended by revising the definition of
``Reservation'' to read as follows:
[Alternative A]
Sec. 371.4 What definitions apply to this program?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
Reservation means a Federal or State Indian reservation; public
domain Indian allotment; former Indian reservation in Oklahoma; land
held by incorporated Native groups, regional corporations, and village
corporations under the provisions of the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act; or a defined area of land recognized by a State or the
Federal Government where there is a concentration of tribal members and
on which the tribal government is providing structured activities and
services.
* * * * *
[Alternative B]
Sec. 371.4 What definitions apply to this program?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
Reservation means only a Federal or State Indian reservation,
public domain Indian allotment, former Indian reservation in Oklahoma,
and land held by incorporated Native groups, regional corporations, and
village corporations under the provisions of the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-14387 Filed 6-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P