federal register - U.S. Government Printing Office

Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Rules and Regulations6315other sections of the proposedregulations, specifically § 361.22(Cooperation with agencies responsiblefor transitioning students).Discussion: The proposed regulationsdefined ‘‘transitioning student’’ as astudent who is eligible under the VRprogram and is receiving transitionservices. The Secretary believes thattransition services, which areauthorized under section 103(a)(14) ofthe Act and defined in § 361.5(b)(47) ofthe final regulations, are limited to thoseservices identified in an eligiblestudent’s IWRP that promote orfacilitate the accomplishment of longtermrehabilitation goals andintermediate rehabilitation objectives.Because assessment services areprovided prior to the development of anIWRP and, therefore, are not transitionservices, student applicants under theprogram were not included within theproposed definition of ‘‘transitioningstudent.’’ Nevertheless, thisinterpretation does not alter theresponsibility of DSUs to evaluatestudent applicants for eligibility for VRservices. As with any individual with adisability, DSUs shall promptly handlea referral of a student for VR services,evaluate the student followingapplication for services, and determinethe student’s eligibility under theprogram within 60 days after theapplication is submitted.The Secretary agrees that thedefinition of the term ‘‘transitioningstudent’’ in the proposed regulations isconfusing, as evidenced by the previouscomments questioning the DSU’sresponsibility with regard to studentapplicants. Other commenters wereconfused by § 361.22(b) of the proposedregulations, which referred to studentswith disabilities who are not receivingspecial education services as‘‘transitioning students.’Changes: The Secretary haseliminated the definition of the term‘‘transitioning student’’, which is notdefined in the Act, from the finalregulations and has replaced that termin the regulations with the term‘‘student with a disability,’’ whichincludes students who are receivingspecial education services and studentswho are not.• TransportationComments: One commenter requestedthat the regulations clarify thattransportation is a support service.Other commenters opposed the examplefollowing the definition that identifiedthe purchase and repair of vehicles as apossible transportation expense. Thesecommenters stated that adherence tothis example would severely depleteDSU resources.Discussion: ‘‘Transportation’’ isdefined in both the proposed and finalregulations as travel and relatedexpenses that are necessary to enable anapplicant or eligible individual toparticipate in a VR service. TheSecretary believes that it is clear fromthis definition that transportation is nota stand-alone service but must be tied tothe provision of other services identifiedin an IWRP.The Secretary emphasizes that theexamples provided under thisdefinition, like all examples throughoutthe regulations, are provided solely forpurposes of illustration and guidanceand are not intended to substitute forDSU determinations in individual cases.Accordingly, the example opposed bysome commenters neither requires norencourages DSUs to purchase or repairvehicles. The example states only thatthe purchase or repair of vehicles isauthorized as a transportation expensein those limited circumstances in whichthe DSU determines that provision ofthis service is necessary for anindividual to participate in a VR serviceand is consistent with DSU policies thatgovern the provision of services.Appropriately developed DSU policiescovering the nature and scope ofservices dictate the extent to which anyservice, including transportation, can beprovided.Changes: None.§ 361.10 Submission, approval, anddisapproval of the State plan.Comments: None.Discussion: The Secretary has revisedthe requirements governing the durationof State plans to reflect recentamendments to section 436 of theGeneral Education Provisions Act(GEPA). Section 436 of GEPA, whichapplies to Rehabilitation Act programs,authorizes the Secretary to establish aState plan period that is longer than thestandard three-year period specified insection 101(a) of the Rehabilitation Actand § 361.10(e) of the proposedregulations. Although RSA willcontinue to require the submission of anew State plan every three years, theregulations now permit RSA to establisha State plan period other than theregular three-year period ifcircumstances warrant. For example,RSA used this statutory authority in FY1996 to extend for a fourth year theState plan covering FYs 1994 through1996 in order to allow these finalregulations to become effective beforerequiring submission of a new Stateplan. The flexibility afforded RSAthrough this regulatory change alsoobviates the need for § 361.10(h) of theproposed regulations, which wouldhave permitted the Secretary to requirean interim State plan covering less thanthree years following a reauthorizationof the Act and prior to the publicationof final regulations.Changes: The Secretary has amended§ 361.10(e) to state that the State planmust cover a multi-year period asdetermined by the Secretary. Inaddition, § 361.10(h) of the proposedregulations has been deleted from thefinal regulations.§ 361.13 State agency foradministrationComments: Some commentersopposed the elimination of therequirement from the draft proposedregulations that the State plan describethe organizational structure of the Stateagency and its organizational units.These commenters stated that theabsence of this description in the Stateplan would make it impossible for RSAto determine whether each DSUoperates at a level comparable to that ofother organizational units within theState agency. Other commentersrecommended, consistent withrequirements in the draft proposedregulations, that the final regulationsauthorize the designated State agency todefine the scope of the program anddirect its administration withoutexternal administrative controls.Additionally, in response to theSecretary’s request in the NPRM, somecommenters identified additionalprogram functions that were notincluded in the proposed regulations forwhich the DSU shall be responsible inorder to meet the statutory requirementin section 101(a)(2)(A) that it beresponsible for the VR program. Theadditional functions identified by thecommenters (determinations of whetheran individual has achieved anemployment outcome; policydevelopment; and administrativecontrol of VR funds) were specified inthe draft proposed regulations. Finally,some commenters stated that therequirement in the proposed regulationsthat at least 90 percent of DSU staff shallbe employed full time on rehabilitationwork was unduly restrictive.Discussion: This section of theproposed regulations was significantlyrevised under the Department’sPrinciples for Regulating in an effort toreduce the paperwork requirementsimposed on State agencies. For example,the Secretary proposed to remove fromcurrent regulations the requirement thatthe State plan describe theorganizational structure of the Stateagency and its organizational units