[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 12 (Thursday, January 17, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3864-3867]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00939]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter III
Proposed Priority--National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research--Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Projects and Centers Program--Rehabilitation Engineering Research
Centers
CFDA Number: 84.133E-1.
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Proposed priority.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services proposes a priority for the Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by
the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
(NIDRR). Specifically, this notice proposes a priority for
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs): Hearing
Enhancement. The Assistant Secretary may use this priority for a
competition in fiscal year (FY) 2013 and later years. We take this
action to focus research attention on areas of national need. We intend
to use this priority to improve rehabilitation services and outcomes
for individuals with disabilities.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before February 19, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Address all comments about this notice to Marlene Spencer,
U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5133,
Potomac Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2700.
If you prefer to send your comments by email, use the following
address: [email protected]. You must include ``Proposed Priorities
for RERCs'' and the priority title in the subject line of your
electronic message.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marlene Spencer. Telephone: (202) 245-
7532 or by email: [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:
This notice of proposed priority is in concert with NIDRR's
currently approved Long-Range Plan (Plan). The Plan, which was
published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2006 (71 FR 8165),
can be accessed on the Internet at the following site: www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/nidrr/policy.html.
Through the implementation of the Plan, NIDRR seeks to: (1) Improve
the quality and utility of disability and rehabilitation research; (2)
foster an exchange of expertise, information, and training methods to
facilitate the advancement of knowledge and understanding of the unique
needs of traditionally underserved populations; (3) determine best
strategies and programs to improve rehabilitation outcomes for
underserved populations; (4) identify research gaps; (5) identify
mechanisms for integrating research and practice; and (6) disseminate
findings.
This notice proposes a priority that NIDRR intends to use for an
RERC competition in FY 2013 and possibly in later years. However,
nothing precludes NIDRR from publishing additional priorities, if
needed. Furthermore, NIDRR is under no obligation to make awards for
this priority. The decision to make an award will be based on the
quality of applications received and available funding.
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
this notice. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in
developing the notice of final priorities, we urge you to identify
clearly the specific topic that each comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Order 12866 and 13563 and their overall
requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result from this
proposed priority. Please let us know of any further ways we could
reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving
the effective and efficient administration of the program.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about this notice in room 5140, 550 12th Street SW., PCP,
Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Washington,
DC time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal holidays.
Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request we will provide an appropriate
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the
public rulemaking record for this notice. If you want to schedule an
appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Disability and
Rehabilitation
[[Page 3865]]
Research Projects and Centers Program is to plan and conduct research,
demonstration projects, training, and related activities, including
international activities; to develop methods, procedures, and
rehabilitation technology that maximize the full inclusion and
integration into society, employment, independent living, family
support, and economic and social self-sufficiency of individuals with
disabilities, especially individuals with the most severe disabilities;
and to improve the effectiveness of services authorized under the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation Act).
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) Program
The purpose of NIDRR's RERCs program, which is funded through the
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program, is
to improve the effectiveness of services authorized under the
Rehabilitation Act. It does so by conducting advanced engineering
research, developing and evaluating innovative technologies,
facilitating service delivery system changes, stimulating the
production and distribution of new technologies and equipment in the
private sector, and providing training opportunities. RERCs seek to
solve rehabilitation problems and remove environmental barriers to
improvements in employment, community living and participation, and
health and function outcomes of individuals with disabilities.
The general requirements for RERCs are set out in subpart D of 34
CFR part 350 (What Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Does the
Secretary Assist?).
Additional information on the RERCs program can be found at:
www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/index.html.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(3).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.
Proposed Priority: This notice contains one proposed priority.
Hearing Enhancement.
Background: Approximately 34.2 million Americans have a hearing
impairment (Kochkin, 2009). An untreated hearing impairment has
profound implications for people across the lifespan (e.g., in
education, school-to-work transition, employment, community
participation, and general social and emotional well-being) (Pallarito,
2010; Kochkin, 2010b; Chisolm et al., 2007a).
Research and development related to hearing enhancement
technologies has produced advances in areas related to digital and
wireless hearing aids, assistive technologies, cochlear and middle ear
implants, and aural rehabilitation, but many research and development
needs remain (Fellinger et al., 2012; Stender, 2011; Groth and
Anthonsen, 2010; Kochkin, 2010a; Chisolm et al., 2007b; Sweetow and
Sabes, 2007; Pirzanski, 2006). For example, research has indicated that
while 95 percent of people with a hearing impairment can benefit from
hearing aids, only 23 percent actually use them (Kochkin, 2007). Among
the many reasons for not using hearing aids are characteristics of the
hearing aids themselves (e.g., the hearing aids are uncomfortable and
unreliable, do not work well in noisy environments, and do not work
seamlessly across multiple settings and technologies) (Kochkin, 2010a;
Kochkin, 2007). Assistive listening devices (e.g., FM systems, infrared
systems, and audio induction loop systems) still have significant
limitations related to portability, usability, and performance,
particularly during group discussions (Harkins and Tucker, 2007). More
research and development is needed on cochlear and middle ear implants
to determine and optimize performance and benefits in real-life
situations (Peterson et al., 2010; Rameh et al., 2010).
Successful hearing enhancement technologies have been demonstrated
to improve the quality of life for people with hearing impairments
(Fellinger et al., 2012; Kochkin, 2010b; Chisolm et al., 2007a, 2007b).
Accordingly, NIDRR seeks to fund an RERC to address problems that
prevent the use of, or reduce the use and benefit of, hearing
enhancement technologies, and to optimize options for people with
hearing impairments.
References:
Chisolm, T.H., Johnson, C.E., Danhaer, J.L., Portz, L.J.P, Abrams,
H.B., Lesner, S., McCarthy, P.A., and Newman, C.W. (2007a). A
systematic review of health-related quality of life and hearing
aids: Final report of the American Academy of Audiology Task Force
on the Health-Related Quality of Life Benefits of Amplification in
Adults. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 18: 151-183.
Chisolm, T.H., Noe, C.M., McArdle, R., and Abrams, H. (2007b).
Evidence for the use of hearing assistive technology by adults: The
role of the FM system. Trends in Amplification, 11(2): 73-89.
Fellinger, J., Holzinger, D., and Pollard, R. (2012). Mental health
of deaf people. The Lancet, 379: 1037-1044.
Groth, J., and Anthonsen, F. (2010). Fewer wires, less complexity,
and more connections: The new challenge for wireless hearing
instruments. Hearing Review, 17(6): 28-36.
Harkins, J., and Tucker, P. (2007). An internet survey of
individuals with hearing loss regarding assistive listening devices.
Trends in Amplification, 11(2): 91-100.
Kochkin, S. (2010a). MarkeTrak VIII: Consumer satisfaction with
hearing aids is slowly increasing. Hearing Journal, 63(1): 19-24.
Kochkin, S. (2010b). MarkeTrak VIII: The efficacy of hearing aids in
achieving compensation equity in the workplace. Hearing Journal,
63(10): 19-26.
Kochkin, S. (2009). MarkeTrak VIII: 25-year trends in the hearing
health market. Hearing Review, 16 (11): 12-31.
Kochkin, S. (2007). MarkeTrak VII: Obstacles to adult non-user
adoption of hearing aids. Hearing Journal, 60(4): 27-43.
Pallarito, K. (2010). Teach patients who hear ``well enough'' the
real cost of neglecting hearing loss. Hearing Journal, 63(8): 19-25.
Peterson, N.R., Pisoni, D.B., & Miyamoto, R.T. (2010). Cochlear
implants and spoken language processing abilities: Review and
assessment of the literature. Medicine, Clinical Neurology and
Exercise & Occupational Therapy, 28(2).
Pirzanski, C. (2006, August). Earmolds and hearing aid shells: A
tutorial part 4: BTE styles, materials, and acoustic modifications.
Hearing Review.
Rameh, C., Meller, R., Lavielle, J., Deveze, A., and Magnan, J.
(2010). Long-term patient satisfaction with different middle ear
implants in sensorineural hearing loss. Ontology & Neurotology,
31(6): 883-892.
Stender, T. (2011). Phone and TV solutions for better hearing.
Hearing Review, 18(10): 24-30.
Sweetow, R.W., and Sabes, J.S. (2007). Technologic advances in aural
rehabilitation: Applications and innovative methods of service
delivery. Trends in Amplification, 11(2): 101-111.
Proposed Priority:
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services proposes the following priority for the establishment of a
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Hearing
Enhancement. The RERC must focus on innovative technological solutions,
new knowledge, and concepts that will improve the lives of individuals
with disabilities.
Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate
technologies, methods, and systems that will improve the accessibility,
usability, and performance of hearing enhancement technologies (e.g.,
hearing aids, ear molds, assistive listening devices, and implants) for
people with hearing loss, including but not limited to people with
untreated hearing loss. This includes: (a) Addressing technological
factors that prevent or reduce adoption of and benefit from hearing
enhancement devices (e.g., hearing aid and implant design features, ear
mold fit and comfort, and assistive listening devices and technologies
for
[[Page 3866]]
group settings); (b) improving the compatibility of hearing enhancement
technologies with other technologies such as cell phones, mobile
devices, television, and the Internet; (c) improving the performance of
hearing enhancement devices in social environments (e.g., school, work,
recreation, and entertainment); and (d) enhancing aural rehabilitation
and consumer involvement strategies (e.g., online access to peer and
expert input on hearing technologies and communication strategies;
consumer focus groups and surveys; and consumer beta testing and review
of products) to maximize hearing enhancement in real-life settings. The
RERC must involve key stakeholders (including but not limited to people
with hearing loss) in the design and implementation of RERC activities.
Types of Priorities:
When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Final Priority: We will announce the final priority in a notice in
the Federal Register. We will determine the final priority after
considering responses to this notice and other information available to
the Department. This notice does not preclude us from proposing
additional priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection
criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use this priority, we invite applications through
a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether
this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to
the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely
to result in a rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or
tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the
Executive order.
This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866.
We have also reviewed this regulatory action under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing this proposed priority only upon a reasoned
determination that its benefits justify its costs. In choosing among
alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that
maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the
Department believes that this proposed priority is consistent with the
principles in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this regulatory action would not
unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
The benefits of the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects
and Centers Programs have been well established over the years, as
projects similar to the one envisioned by the proposed priority have
been completed successfully. Establishing new RERCs based on the
proposed priority would generate new knowledge through research and
development and improve the lives of individuals with disabilities. The
new RERCs would generate, disseminate, and promote the use of new
information that would improve the options for individuals with
disabilities to fully participate in their communities.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is not subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc) by
[[Page 3867]]
contacting the Grants and Contracts Services Team, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC
20202-2550. Telephone: (202) 245-7363. If you use a TDD or TTY, call
the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free
Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well
as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal
Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF
you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the
site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at:
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Dated: January 14, 2013.
Michael Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2013-00939 Filed 1-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P