Magnet Schools Assistance Program, 10605-10607 [E7-4270]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 46 / Friday, March 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Approved: February 6, 2007.
Gregg A. Cervi,
Commander, JAGC, U.S. Navy Deputy
Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty
and Maritime Law).
[FR Doc. E7–4254 Filed 3–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD05–07–018]
RIN 1625–AA–09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Susquehanna River, at Havre de Grace,
MD
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of temporary deviation
from regulations.
AGENCY:
erjones on PRODPC74 with RULES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Commander, Fifth Coast
Guard District, has approved a
temporary deviation from the
regulations governing the operation of
the National Railroad Passenger
Corporation (AMTRAK) Bridge, at mile
1.0, across Susquehanna River at Havre
de Grace, Maryland. This deviation
allows the drawbridge to remain closedto-navigation beginning at 6 p.m. on
March 30, 2007, until and including 6
p.m. on June 8, 2007, to facilitate
structural repairs.
DATES: This deviation is effective from
6 p.m. on March 30, 2007, until 6 p.m.
on June 8, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Materials referred to in this
document are available for inspection or
copying at Commander (dpb), Fifth
Coast Guard District, Federal Building,
1st Floor, 431 Crawford Street,
Portsmouth, VA 23704–5004 between 8
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is (757) 398–6222.
Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard
District maintains the public docket for
this temporary deviation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill
H. Brazier, Bridge Management
Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at
(757) 398–6422.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
AMTRAK Bridge, a swing-type
drawbridge, has a vertical clearance in
the closed position to vessels of 52 feet,
above mean high water.
AMTRAK, the bridge owner, has
requested a temporary deviation from
the current operating regulation set out
in 33 CFR 117.575 and to close the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Mar 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
drawbridge to navigation to perform
needed structural repairs.
The repairs will include the renewal
of 3,184 bridge timbers as well as the
installation of new rail and expansion
joints. To facilitate this work, the
AMTRAK Bridge will be maintained in
the closed-to-navigation position
beginning at 6 p.m. on March 30, 2007,
until and including 6 p.m. on June 8,
2007.
The Coast Guard has informed the
known users of the waterway of the
closure periods for the bridge so that
these vessels can arrange their transits
to minimize any impact caused by the
temporary deviation.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e),
the drawbridge must return to its regular
operating schedule immediately at the
end of the designated time period.
This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR
117.35.
Dated: February 28, 2007.
Waverly W. Gregory, Jr.,
Chief, Bridge Administration Branch, Fifth
Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7–4215 Filed 3–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Part 280
Magnet Schools Assistance Program
Office of Innovation and
Improvement, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final regulations.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Secretary amends the
regulations governing the Magnet
Schools Assistance Program (MSAP) in
34 CFR part 280. These amendments
allow the MSAP to use an approach
similar to that in § 75.200 for
establishing selection criteria in grant
competitions. Under this approach the
MSAP has the flexibility to use selection
criteria from its program regulations,
from the menu of general selection
criteria in the Education Department
General Administrative Regulations
(EDGAR) in § 75.210, based on statutory
provisions in accordance with § 75.209,
or from any combination of these.
DATES: These regulations are effective
April 9, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steven L. Brockhouse, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue,
SW., room 4W229, Washington, DC
20202–5970. Telephone: (202) 260–2476
or via Internet:
steve.brockhouse@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD), you may call
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10605
the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1–
800–877–8339.
Individuals with disabilities may
obtain this document in an alternative
format (e.g., Braille, large print,
audiotape, or computer diskette) on
request to the contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
On August
22, 2006 the Secretary published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
for these amendments in the Federal
Register (71 FR 48866).
In the preamble to the NPRM, the
Secretary discussed on pages 48866 and
48867 the major changes proposed in
that document to provide the MSAP
with the flexibility to use different types
of selection criteria when evaluating
grant applications in a specific grant
competition. These included the
following:
• Amending § 280.30 to give the
Secretary the flexibility to use selection
criteria from § 280.31, from the
approved menu of general selection
criteria in § 75.210 or from selection
criteria based on statutory provisions
governing the MSAP, established in
accordance with § 75.209.
• Amending § 280.31 to remove the
mandatory point values from the
selection criteria in this section of the
MSAP regulations.
There are no differences between the
NPRM and these final regulations.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Analysis of Comments
In response to the Secretary’s
invitation in the NPRM, nine parties
submitted comments on the proposed
regulations. An analysis of the
comments follows.
We discuss substantive issues under
the sections of the regulations to which
they pertain. Generally, we do not
address technical and other minor
changes—and suggested changes the
law does not authorize the Secretary to
make.
Section 280.30 How Does the Secretary
Evaluate an Application?
Comment: Two commenters
expressed the opinion that the current
selection criteria work effectively to
address the MSAP’s statutory purpose
and requirements, and consequently
that a change in approach to permit the
use of other selection criteria is not
needed at this time.
Discussion: The Department proposed
these changes because we have been
constrained in past MSAP competitions
to using only the program selection
criteria in § 280.31, whether or not their
use continues to work well in the
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
erjones on PRODPC74 with RULES
10606
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 46 / Friday, March 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
selection of new projects that are likely
to be effective in achieving results. This
approach limited our ability to tailor the
selection criteria in a manner that
allowed us to take into consideration
current program needs, new research
findings relating to magnet schools, or
other appropriate information in order
to facilitate the selection of applications
that show the greatest promise of
meeting the program’s statutory
purposes.
The amended regulations provide the
flexibility to make adjustments to the
selection criteria that are used for a
particular competition. Implementation
of this change does not mean that
existing selection criteria that continue
to work effectively in the selection of
high-quality applications for awards
will be disregarded or abandoned. In
fact, it is unlikely that the use of this
approach will result in major changes
from one grant competition to the next.
Nonetheless, the Department does
believe that the flexibility gained in
using this approach will enable us to
more effectively tailor selection criteria
to ensure projects best address the
purpose and requirements of the MSAP
statute.
Change: None.
Comment: Two commenters
expressed concerns about the effects of
different criteria, especially general
criteria from EDGAR, and indicated that
they believed that the use of such
criteria would be detrimental to the
quality of applications.
Discussion: Any criterion or factor
from the approved menu in § 75.210
must be considered in the context of the
MSAP and in conjunction with
applicable statutory provisions and
program regulations. As a result, we do
not believe that the use of selection
criteria or factors from § 75.210 will
negatively affect program quality.
Change: None.
Comment: Two commenters criticized
the approach in § 280.30 because they
believed that it would provide too much
flexibility to manipulate the MSAP’s
statutory purpose or disregard
desegregation-related factors.
Discussion: Fears that this approach
will allow the Secretary to supersede
statutory provisions or program
requirements are misplaced. The
Secretary is bound by statutory
provisions. In evaluating applications,
the Department must adhere to selection
criteria or other provisions related to the
evaluation of applications that are
required by statute and the regulations.
In addition, the Department intends to
use this approach to establish selection
criteria in conjunction with the statute
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Mar 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
and program requirements in the MSAP
regulations, not instead of them.
Change: None.
Comment: One commenter criticized
the approach in § 280.30 because the
public would not be afforded the
opportunity to comment formally on the
Department’s choice of selection criteria
for a particular competition and another
commenter indicated that rulemaking
for each proposed change or set of
changes would be preferable.
Discussion: The Magnet Schools
Assistance Program (MSAP) Application
for Grants is approved under OMB
number 1855–0011. This information
collection follows the streamlined grant
application clearance procedures
approved under OMB numbers 1890–
0001 and 1890–0006. For special
information collection processes such as
the use of generic grant applications
using the EDGAR selection criteria,
public comment on the information
collection is generally solicited at three
year intervals. The current approval for
the MSAP application package expires
April 30, 2007 and the Department will
publish a Federal Register notice
shortly to solicit comments on that
application package (1855–0011).
The Department welcomes comments
and suggestions on selection criteria,
and the application process generally,
apart from formal opportunities to
comment. Potential applicants, grantees,
program beneficiaries, and others are
encouraged to advise the Department
about their experience with the
selection criteria, and to provide
recommendations for criteria for future
competitions at any time, for the
Department’s use in designing selection
criteria.
Moreover, as discussed earlier in
these comments, the Department
believes that this approach provides
flexibility to make adjustments to the
selection criteria that are used for a
particular competition and that the
flexibility gained in using this approach
will enable us to more effectively tailor
selection criteria to help ensure the
selection of projects that best address
the purpose and requirements of the
MSAP statute.
Change: None.
Comment: Other commenters
expressed varying views regarding the
approach in § 280.30 that would give
the Secretary the flexibility to use
selection criteria from the approved
menu of general selection criteria in
§ 75.210 or from selection criteria based
on statutory provisions governing the
MSAP, in accordance with § 75.209.
One commenter indicated that the
additional flexibility would be
beneficial. Three others expressed
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
reservations about this approach, but
only in the context of whether there
would be sufficient time available to
adequately address any new selection
criteria. One other commenter also
expressed concern that the change
would have a detrimental effect on
planning prior to the announcement of
selection criteria.
Discussion: The Secretary does not
believe that the new approach will
prevent potential applicants from
beginning to prepare applications in
advance of an application
announcement. Applicants may begin
work on the basis of statutory purposes
and requirements. Additionally, it is
unlikely that there will be substantial
changes in the selection criteria used in
evaluating applications from one
competition to the next in the absence
of statutory changes that might
otherwise require more significant
revisions. Further, under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, an agency must
obtain OMB approval to require
responses to an information collection
in less than 30 days. As a result, under
most circumstances respondents will
have a minimum of 30 days to prepare
applications and in most instances an
even longer period based on past
practices. Over the previous four MSAP
competitions, applicants have actually
had a minimum of 42 days from the date
of publication of the application notice
to the application due date in which to
prepare applications, and an average of
more than 60 days in which to prepare
applications over the course of these
four competitions.
Change: None.
Section 280.31 What Selection Criteria
Does the Secretary Use?
Comment: Two commenters
addressed the amendment to § 280.31
that removes the mandatory point
values from the selection criteria in this
section of the MSAP regulations. One
commenter expressed the opinion that
removing point values was not a good
idea, however the commenter offered no
explanation of this position. The other
commenter sought clarification
regarding whether a different set of
point values for selection criteria would
be used.
Discussion: Removing the currently
specified point values from the selection
criteria in § 280.31 does not mean that
point values will not be used. As set
forth in § 280.30(e), there will continue
to be 100 points awarded for the
selection criteria. Removing the
mandatory point values merely provides
the flexibility to assign specific point
values based on the selection criteria
actually used in a particular
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 46 / Friday, March 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
competition, consistent with the
Department’s approach for other
discretionary grant programs that use
selection criteria from § 75.210 and
selection criteria based on the statute, as
set forth in § 75.209, as well as selection
criteria from program regulations.
Change: None.
Executive Order 12866
We have reviewed these final
regulations in accordance with
Executive Order 12866. Under the terms
of the order we have assessed the
potential costs and benefits of this
regulatory action.
The potential costs associated with
the final regulations are those resulting
from statutory requirements and those
we have determined to be necessary for
administering this program effectively
and efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and
benefits—both quantitative and
qualitative—of these final regulations,
we have determined that the benefits of
the regulations justify the costs.
We have also determined that this
regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
Summary of Potential Costs and
Benefits
We summarized the potential costs
and benefits of these final regulations in
the preamble to the NPRM (71 FR
48867).
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
does not require you to respond to a
collection of information unless it
displays a valid OMB control number.
We display the valid OMB control
number assigned to the collection of
information in these final regulations at
the end of the affected section of the
regulations.
erjones on PRODPC74 with RULES
Intergovernmental Review
This program is subject to the
requirements of Executive Order 12372
and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
The objective of the Executive order is
to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened
federalism by relying on processes
developed by State and local
governments for coordination and
review of proposed Federal financial
assistance.
In accordance with the order, we
intend this document to provide early
notification of the Department’s specific
plans and actions for this program.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Mar 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well
as all other Department of Education
documents published in the Federal
Register, in text or Adobe Portable
Document Format (PDF) on the Internet
at the following site: https://www.ed.gov/
news/fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe
Acrobat Reader, which is available free
at this site. If you have questions about
using PDF, call the U.S. Government
Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1–
888–293–6498; or in the Washington,
DC, area at (202) 512–1530.
You may also view this document in
text or PDF at the following site:
https://www.ed.gov/programs/magnet/
applicant.html.
Note: 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 on GPO
Access at: https://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/
index.html.
10607
(3) Selection criteria established
under 34 CFR 75.210; or
(4) Any combination of criteria from
paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of
this section.
(c) The Secretary indicates in the
application notice published in the
Federal Register the specific criteria
that the Secretary will use and how
points for the selection criteria will be
distributed.
(d) The Secretary evaluates an
application submitted under this part on
the basis of criteria described in
paragraph (c) of this section and the
priority factors in § 280.32.
(e) The Secretary awards up to 100
points for the extent to which an
application meets the criteria described
in paragraph (c) of this section.
(f) The Secretary then awards up to 30
additional points based upon the
priority factors in § 280.32.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Number 84.165A Magnet Schools Assistance
Program.)
(Approved by the Office of Management and
Budget under control number 1855–0011)
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7231–7231j)
List of Subjects in 34 CFR Part 280
§ 280.31
Civil rights, Desegregation, Education,
Elementary and secondary education,
Grant programs—education, Magnet
schools, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
I
Dated: March 6, 2007.
Morgan S. Brown,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and
Improvement.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Assistant Deputy
Secretary for Innovation and
Improvement amends part 280 of title
34 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
I
PART 280—MAGNET SCHOOLS
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for part 280
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7231–7231j, unless
otherwise noted.
2. Section 280.30 is revised to read as
follows:
I
§ 280.30 How does the Secretary evaluate
an application?
[Amended]
3. Section 280.31 is amended:
I A. In the introductory text, by
removing the word ‘‘uses’’ and adding,
in its place, the words ‘‘may use’’.
I B. In paragraph (a) introductory text,
by removing the parenthetical ‘‘(25
points)’’.
I C. In paragraph (b) introductory text,
by removing the parenthetical ‘‘(10
points)’’.
I D. In paragraph (c) introductory text,
by removing the parenthetical ‘‘(35
points)’’.
I E. In paragraph (d) introductory text,
by removing the parenthetical ‘‘(5
points)’’.
I F. In paragraph (e) introductory text,
by removing the parenthetical ‘‘(15
points)’’.
I G. In paragraph (f) introductory text,
by removing the parenthetical ‘‘(10
points)’’.
[FR Doc. E7–4270 Filed 3–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
(a) The Secretary evaluates an
application under the procedures in 34
CFR part 75 and this part.
(b) To evaluate an application for a
new grant the Secretary may use—
(1) Selection criteria established
under 34 CFR 75.209;
(2) Selection criteria in § 280.31;
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 46 (Friday, March 9, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10605-10607]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4270]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Part 280
Magnet Schools Assistance Program
AGENCY: Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Secretary amends the regulations governing the Magnet
Schools Assistance Program (MSAP) in 34 CFR part 280. These amendments
allow the MSAP to use an approach similar to that in Sec. 75.200 for
establishing selection criteria in grant competitions. Under this
approach the MSAP has the flexibility to use selection criteria from
its program regulations, from the menu of general selection criteria in
the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in
Sec. 75.210, based on statutory provisions in accordance with Sec.
75.209, or from any combination of these.
DATES: These regulations are effective April 9, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven L. Brockhouse, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 4W229, Washington, DC
20202-5970. Telephone: (202) 260-2476 or via Internet:
steve.brockhouse@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may
call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 22, 2006 the Secretary published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for these amendments in the
Federal Register (71 FR 48866).
In the preamble to the NPRM, the Secretary discussed on pages 48866
and 48867 the major changes proposed in that document to provide the
MSAP with the flexibility to use different types of selection criteria
when evaluating grant applications in a specific grant competition.
These included the following:
Amending Sec. 280.30 to give the Secretary the
flexibility to use selection criteria from Sec. 280.31, from the
approved menu of general selection criteria in Sec. 75.210 or from
selection criteria based on statutory provisions governing the MSAP,
established in accordance with Sec. 75.209.
Amending Sec. 280.31 to remove the mandatory point values
from the selection criteria in this section of the MSAP regulations.
There are no differences between the NPRM and these final
regulations.
Analysis of Comments
In response to the Secretary's invitation in the NPRM, nine parties
submitted comments on the proposed regulations. An analysis of the
comments follows.
We discuss substantive issues under the sections of the regulations
to which they pertain. Generally, we do not address technical and other
minor changes--and suggested changes the law does not authorize the
Secretary to make.
Section 280.30 How Does the Secretary Evaluate an Application?
Comment: Two commenters expressed the opinion that the current
selection criteria work effectively to address the MSAP's statutory
purpose and requirements, and consequently that a change in approach to
permit the use of other selection criteria is not needed at this time.
Discussion: The Department proposed these changes because we have
been constrained in past MSAP competitions to using only the program
selection criteria in Sec. 280.31, whether or not their use continues
to work well in the
[[Page 10606]]
selection of new projects that are likely to be effective in achieving
results. This approach limited our ability to tailor the selection
criteria in a manner that allowed us to take into consideration current
program needs, new research findings relating to magnet schools, or
other appropriate information in order to facilitate the selection of
applications that show the greatest promise of meeting the program's
statutory purposes.
The amended regulations provide the flexibility to make adjustments
to the selection criteria that are used for a particular competition.
Implementation of this change does not mean that existing selection
criteria that continue to work effectively in the selection of high-
quality applications for awards will be disregarded or abandoned. In
fact, it is unlikely that the use of this approach will result in major
changes from one grant competition to the next. Nonetheless, the
Department does believe that the flexibility gained in using this
approach will enable us to more effectively tailor selection criteria
to ensure projects best address the purpose and requirements of the
MSAP statute.
Change: None.
Comment: Two commenters expressed concerns about the effects of
different criteria, especially general criteria from EDGAR, and
indicated that they believed that the use of such criteria would be
detrimental to the quality of applications.
Discussion: Any criterion or factor from the approved menu in Sec.
75.210 must be considered in the context of the MSAP and in conjunction
with applicable statutory provisions and program regulations. As a
result, we do not believe that the use of selection criteria or factors
from Sec. 75.210 will negatively affect program quality.
Change: None.
Comment: Two commenters criticized the approach in Sec. 280.30
because they believed that it would provide too much flexibility to
manipulate the MSAP's statutory purpose or disregard desegregation-
related factors.
Discussion: Fears that this approach will allow the Secretary to
supersede statutory provisions or program requirements are misplaced.
The Secretary is bound by statutory provisions. In evaluating
applications, the Department must adhere to selection criteria or other
provisions related to the evaluation of applications that are required
by statute and the regulations. In addition, the Department intends to
use this approach to establish selection criteria in conjunction with
the statute and program requirements in the MSAP regulations, not
instead of them.
Change: None.
Comment: One commenter criticized the approach in Sec. 280.30
because the public would not be afforded the opportunity to comment
formally on the Department's choice of selection criteria for a
particular competition and another commenter indicated that rulemaking
for each proposed change or set of changes would be preferable.
Discussion: The Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP)
Application for Grants is approved under OMB number 1855-0011. This
information collection follows the streamlined grant application
clearance procedures approved under OMB numbers 1890-0001 and 1890-
0006. For special information collection processes such as the use of
generic grant applications using the EDGAR selection criteria, public
comment on the information collection is generally solicited at three
year intervals. The current approval for the MSAP application package
expires April 30, 2007 and the Department will publish a Federal
Register notice shortly to solicit comments on that application package
(1855-0011).
The Department welcomes comments and suggestions on selection
criteria, and the application process generally, apart from formal
opportunities to comment. Potential applicants, grantees, program
beneficiaries, and others are encouraged to advise the Department about
their experience with the selection criteria, and to provide
recommendations for criteria for future competitions at any time, for
the Department's use in designing selection criteria.
Moreover, as discussed earlier in these comments, the Department
believes that this approach provides flexibility to make adjustments to
the selection criteria that are used for a particular competition and
that the flexibility gained in using this approach will enable us to
more effectively tailor selection criteria to help ensure the selection
of projects that best address the purpose and requirements of the MSAP
statute.
Change: None.
Comment: Other commenters expressed varying views regarding the
approach in Sec. 280.30 that would give the Secretary the flexibility
to use selection criteria from the approved menu of general selection
criteria in Sec. 75.210 or from selection criteria based on statutory
provisions governing the MSAP, in accordance with Sec. 75.209. One
commenter indicated that the additional flexibility would be
beneficial. Three others expressed reservations about this approach,
but only in the context of whether there would be sufficient time
available to adequately address any new selection criteria. One other
commenter also expressed concern that the change would have a
detrimental effect on planning prior to the announcement of selection
criteria.
Discussion: The Secretary does not believe that the new approach
will prevent potential applicants from beginning to prepare
applications in advance of an application announcement. Applicants may
begin work on the basis of statutory purposes and requirements.
Additionally, it is unlikely that there will be substantial changes in
the selection criteria used in evaluating applications from one
competition to the next in the absence of statutory changes that might
otherwise require more significant revisions. Further, under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, an agency must obtain OMB approval to
require responses to an information collection in less than 30 days. As
a result, under most circumstances respondents will have a minimum of
30 days to prepare applications and in most instances an even longer
period based on past practices. Over the previous four MSAP
competitions, applicants have actually had a minimum of 42 days from
the date of publication of the application notice to the application
due date in which to prepare applications, and an average of more than
60 days in which to prepare applications over the course of these four
competitions.
Change: None.
Section 280.31 What Selection Criteria Does the Secretary Use?
Comment: Two commenters addressed the amendment to Sec. 280.31
that removes the mandatory point values from the selection criteria in
this section of the MSAP regulations. One commenter expressed the
opinion that removing point values was not a good idea, however the
commenter offered no explanation of this position. The other commenter
sought clarification regarding whether a different set of point values
for selection criteria would be used.
Discussion: Removing the currently specified point values from the
selection criteria in Sec. 280.31 does not mean that point values will
not be used. As set forth in Sec. 280.30(e), there will continue to be
100 points awarded for the selection criteria. Removing the mandatory
point values merely provides the flexibility to assign specific point
values based on the selection criteria actually used in a particular
[[Page 10607]]
competition, consistent with the Department's approach for other
discretionary grant programs that use selection criteria from Sec.
75.210 and selection criteria based on the statute, as set forth in
Sec. 75.209, as well as selection criteria from program regulations.
Change: None.
Executive Order 12866
We have reviewed these final regulations in accordance with
Executive Order 12866. Under the terms of the order we have assessed
the potential costs and benefits of this regulatory action.
The potential costs associated with the final regulations are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined to
be necessary for administering this program effectively and
efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative
and qualitative--of these final regulations, we have determined that
the benefits of the regulations justify the costs.
We have also determined that this regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the exercise of
their governmental functions.
Summary of Potential Costs and Benefits
We summarized the potential costs and benefits of these final
regulations in the preamble to the NPRM (71 FR 48867).
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 does not require you to respond
to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control
number. We display the valid OMB control number assigned to the
collection of information in these final regulations at the end of the
affected section of the regulations.
Intergovernmental Review
This program is subject to the requirements of Executive Order
12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. The objective of the
Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a
strengthened federalism by relying on processes developed by State and
local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal
financial assistance.
In accordance with the order, we intend this document to provide
early notification of the Department's specific plans and actions for
this program.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site:
https://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in
the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.
You may also view this document in text or PDF at the following
site: https://www.ed.gov/programs/magnet/applicant.html.
Note: 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 on GPO Access at: https://www.gpoaccess.gov/
nara/.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 84.165A Magnet
Schools Assistance Program.)
List of Subjects in 34 CFR Part 280
Civil rights, Desegregation, Education, Elementary and secondary
education, Grant programs--education, Magnet schools, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: March 6, 2007.
Morgan S. Brown,
Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Assistant Deputy
Secretary for Innovation and Improvement amends part 280 of title 34 of
the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 280--MAGNET SCHOOLS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for part 280 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7231-7231j, unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Section 280.30 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 280.30 How does the Secretary evaluate an application?
(a) The Secretary evaluates an application under the procedures in
34 CFR part 75 and this part.
(b) To evaluate an application for a new grant the Secretary may
use--
(1) Selection criteria established under 34 CFR 75.209;
(2) Selection criteria in Sec. 280.31;
(3) Selection criteria established under 34 CFR 75.210; or
(4) Any combination of criteria from paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and
(b)(3) of this section.
(c) The Secretary indicates in the application notice published in
the Federal Register the specific criteria that the Secretary will use
and how points for the selection criteria will be distributed.
(d) The Secretary evaluates an application submitted under this
part on the basis of criteria described in paragraph (c) of this
section and the priority factors in Sec. 280.32.
(e) The Secretary awards up to 100 points for the extent to which
an application meets the criteria described in paragraph (c) of this
section.
(f) The Secretary then awards up to 30 additional points based upon
the priority factors in Sec. 280.32.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control
number 1855-0011)
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7231-7231j)
Sec. 280.31 [Amended]
0
3. Section 280.31 is amended:
0
A. In the introductory text, by removing the word ``uses'' and adding,
in its place, the words ``may use''.
0
B. In paragraph (a) introductory text, by removing the parenthetical
``(25 points)''.
0
C. In paragraph (b) introductory text, by removing the parenthetical
``(10 points)''.
0
D. In paragraph (c) introductory text, by removing the parenthetical
``(35 points)''.
0
E. In paragraph (d) introductory text, by removing the parenthetical
``(5 points)''.
0
F. In paragraph (e) introductory text, by removing the parenthetical
``(15 points)''.
0
G. In paragraph (f) introductory text, by removing the parenthetical
``(10 points)''.
[FR Doc. E7-4270 Filed 3-8-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P