Senior Community Service Employment Program; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 47770-47815 [E8-17802]

Agencies

• Employment and Training Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 158 (Thursday, August 14, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47770-47815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17802]



[[Page 47769]]

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

Part IV





Department of Labor





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



Employment and Training Administration



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



20 CFR Part 641



Senior Community Service Employment Program; Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 158 / Thursday, August 14, 2008 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 47770]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

20 CFR Part 641

RIN 1205-AB48


Senior Community Service Employment Program; Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking

AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking with request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Employment and Training Administration of the Department 
of Labor (Department) is issuing this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(NPRM) to propose changes in the Senior Community Service Employment 
Program resulting from the 2006 Amendments to title V of the Older 
Americans Act, and to clarify various policies. Key proposed changes 
include the introduction of a 48-month limit on participation, regular 
competition for national grants, and an available increase in the 
proportion of grant funds that can be used for participant training and 
supportive services. Comments on this proposed rule are welcome 
according to the dates listed below.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on this 
proposed rule. To ensure consideration, comments must be received on or 
before October 14, 2008. Comments received after that date will be 
considered to the extent possible. Comments should be limited to the 
proposed changes and additions to the current regulations, all of which 
are discussed in the preamble to this NPRM, or to other changes to the 
current regulations which flow from the 2006 Amendments.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Regulatory 
Information Number (RIN) 1205-AB48, by either of the following methods:
     Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the Web site instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail and hand delivery/courier: Written comments, disk, 
and CD-Rom submissions may be mailed to Thomas M. Dowd, Administrator, 
Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Labor, 
200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N-5641, Washington, DC 20210.
    Instructions: Label all submissions with RIN 1205-AB48.
    Please be advised that the Department will post all comments 
received on www.regulations.gov without making any change to the 
comments, or redacting any information. The www.regulations.gov Web 
site is the Federal e-rulemaking portal and all comments posted there 
are available and accessible to the public. Therefore, the Department 
recommends that commenters safeguard any personal information such as 
Social Security Numbers, personal addresses, telephone numbers, and e-
mail addresses included in their comments as such may become easily 
available to the public via the www.regulations.gov Web site. It is the 
responsibility of the commenter to safeguard his or her information.
    Also, please note that due to security concerns, postal mail 
delivery in Washington, DC, may be delayed. Therefore, the Department 
encourages the public to submit comments via the Internet as indicated 
above.
    Docket: The Department will make all the comments it receives 
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the 
above address. If you need assistance to review the comments, the 
Department will provide you with appropriate aids such as readers or 
print magnifiers. The Department will make copies of the rule 
available, upon request, in large print and electronic file on computer 
disk. The Department will consider providing the rule in other formats 
upon request. To schedule an appointment to review the comments and/or 
obtain the rule in an alternative format, contact the Office of Policy 
Development and Research at (202) 693-3700 (not a toll-free number). 
You may also contact this office at the address listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sherril Hurd, Acting Team Leader, 
Regulations Unit, Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. 
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N-5641, 
Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-3700 (this is not a toll-free 
number).
    Individuals with hearing or speech impairments may access the 
telephone number above via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal 
Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The preamble to this proposed rule is 
organized as follows:

I. Background--Provides a Brief Description of the Development of 
the Proposed Rule
II. Section-By-Section Review of the Proposed Rule--Summarizes and 
Discusses Proposed Changes to the Senior Community Service 
Employment Program (SCSEP) Regulations
III. Administrative Information--Sets Forth the Applicable 
Regulatory Requirements

I. Background

    On October 17, 2006, President Bush signed the Older Americans Act 
(OAA) Amendments of 2006, Public Law 109-365 (2006 OAA). This law 
amended the statute authorizing SCSEP and necessitates changes to the 
SCSEP regulations. The Department's Employment and Training 
Administration (ETA) promulgated an IFR on June 29, 2007 that 
implemented changes in the SCSEP performance measurement system 
required by the 2006 OAA. This proposed rule proposes to implement the 
remainder of the changes in the SCSEP necessitated by the 2006 OAA, and 
to clarify various program policies.
    The SCSEP, authorized by title V of the OAA, is the only Federally-
sponsored employment and training program targeted specifically to low-
income older individuals who want to enter or re-enter the workforce. 
Participants must be unemployed, 55 years of age or older, and have 
incomes no more than 125 percent of the Federal poverty level. The 
program offers participants training at community service employment 
assignments in public and non-profit agencies. The goals of the program 
are to move SCSEP participants into unsubsidized employment so that 
they can achieve economic self-sufficiency, and to promote useful 
opportunities in community service activities. In the 2006 OAA, 
Congress expressed its sense of the benefits of the SCSEP, stating, 
``placing older individuals in community service positions strengthens 
the ability of the individuals to become self-sufficient, provides 
much-needed support to organizations that benefit from increased civic 
engagement, and strengthens the communities that are served by such 
organizations.'' OAA section 516(2).
    Many of the policy initiatives contained in the 2000 OAA, Public 
Law 106-501, and reflected in the 2004 SCSEP final rule, 69 FR 19014, 
Apr. 19, 2004, are maintained in the 2006 OAA and this proposed rule. 
Other policies are amplified. Most notably, there is a greater emphasis 
on placing individuals in unsubsidized employment, as evidenced by the 
new 48-month limitation on participation in the SCSEP (OAA sec. 
518(a)(3)(B); Sec.  641.570 of this part); the new limitations on 
benefits (OAA sec. 502(c)(6)(A)(i); Sec.  641.565 of this part); and 
the increase in available funds for training and supportive services to 
prepare participants for the unsubsidized workforce (OAA sec. 
502(c)(6)(C); Sec.  641.874 of this part). A focus on the transition of 
participants

[[Page 47771]]

into unsubsidized employment allows more eligible individuals to be 
served by the SCSEP and thus to potentially benefit from employment 
opportunities and income gains.
    Coordination between the SCSEP and the programs under the Workforce 
Investment Act of 1998 (WIA), 29 U.S.C. 2801 et seq., continues to be 
an important objective of the 2006 OAA. With the enactment of WIA in 
1998, the SCSEP became a required partner in the workforce investment 
system. 29 U.S.C. 2841(b)(1)(B)(vi). In 2000, Congress amended the 
SCSEP to require coordination with the WIA One-Stop Delivery System 
(Pub. L. 106-501 sec. 505(c)(1)), including reciprocal use of 
assessment mechanisms and Individual Employment Plans (Pub. L. 106-501 
sec. 502(b)(4)). The underlying notion of the One-Stop Delivery System 
is the coordination of programs, services, and governance structures, 
so that the customer has access to a seamless system of workforce 
investment services.
    Consistent with current SCSEP practice, both WIA and the 2006 OAA 
require any grantee operating a SCSEP project in a local area to 
negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Local Workforce 
Investment Board. WIA section 121; OAA section 511(b); see also OAA 
section 502(b)(1)(O). The MOU must detail the SCSEP project's 
involvement in the One-Stop Delivery System. In particular, SCSEP 
grantees/sub-recipients must make arrangements to provide their 
participants, eligible individuals the grantees are unable to serve, as 
well as SCSEP-ineligible individuals, with access to services available 
in the One-Stop Centers. OAA secs. 510, 511; Sec. Sec.  641.210, 
641.220 of this part.
    Because the SCSEP is a required partner under WIA, SCSEP grantees 
and sub-recipients must ensure that they are familiar with WIA's 
statutory and regulatory provisions. Congress is considering 
legislation to reauthorize WIA, and reauthorization may bring changes 
to the law. SCSEP grantees and sub-recipients must ensure that they 
keep current on any changes in WIA law that could impact their program.
    The 2006 OAA also increases the accountability of grantees by 
clearly requiring a competitive process for grant awards. This proposed 
rule implements the statute's requirement that the national SCSEP 
grants be re-competed regularly, generally every four years. OAA 
section 514(a); Sec.  641.490(a) of this part. This proposed rule also 
implements the statute's requirement that a State compete its SCSEP 
grant if the current State grantee fails to meet its core performance 
goals for three consecutive years. OAA sec. 513(d)(3)(B)(iii); Sec.  
641.490(b) of this part.
    In addition, the 2006 OAA establishes new funding opportunities for 
pilot, demonstration, and evaluation projects (OAA sec. 502(e); Sec.  
641.600-640 of this part), expands the priority-for-service categories 
(OAA sec. 518(b); Sec.  641.520 of this part), and modifies how the 
program determines income eligibility (OAA sec. 518(3)(A); Sec.  
641.510 of this part).
    To the extent that the 2006 OAA does not change the 2000 OAA, these 
proposed regulations do not change the statutory interpretations or 
policy positions that supported the current regulations. The SCSEP is 
an established program; we do not propose to begin anew with this 
proposed rule but rather build upon the regulatory framework that has 
developed over the years. The proposed changes, mostly necessitated by 
statutory revisions, are discussed further in the next section of the 
preamble.
    The Department notes that it will continue to use the name ``Senior 
Community Service Employment Program'' for this program, although the 
OAA refers to it in various terms.
    The Department solicits comments on this proposed rule. For ease of 
reading, the Department is publishing the full regulatory text for 
subparts B-F, H and I. The regulatory text that was amended in the IFR, 
which includes all of subpart G and some definitions in subpart A, is 
not reprinted here. With the exception of Sec.  641.140 (definitions), 
the regulatory text herein includes the proposed changes as well as the 
several provisions that are unchanged. We are not reprinting unchanged 
definitions. The Department solicits comments on the proposed changes 
in this notice. We particularly invite comments, in accordance with the 
requirements of section 514(f) of the 2006 OAA, addressing any concerns 
that these proposed regulations significantly compromise the ability of 
grantees to serve their targeted populations of minority older 
individuals, in areas where substantial populations of minority 
individuals reside.

II. Section-by-Section Review of the Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule amends subparts A-F, H, and I of part 641 of 
Title 20 of the Code of Federal Regulations. It proposes changes 
required by the 2006 OAA, and proposes to clarify various policies. The 
Department previously promulgated an IFR, 72 FR 35832, June 29, 2007, 
which addressed changes in the SCSEP performance measurement system 
required by the 2006 OAA. The IFR revised subpart G, which addresses 
performance accountability, and added several definitions to, and 
revised certain definitions within, subpart A that relate to the 
performance measures. The amendments that were contained in the IFR are 
not repeated here.
    The Department proposes to make two changes that affect many of the 
subparts. We now refer to sub-recipients along with grantees where the 
responsibility or requirement being discussed applies to not just the 
grantees, but their sub-recipients as well. We also change from the 
term ``community service assignment'' to ``community service employment 
assignment'' throughout this part to be consistent with a similar 
change in the language of the statute (see, e.g., OAA section 
502(b)(1)(A)), and to emphasize the SCSEP's goal of employment in 
addition to community service (OAA sec. 502(a)(1)). By including 
``employment'' in the phrase ``community service employment 
assignment,'' the Department does not mean that participants have a 
right to long-term employment under the SCSEP, however. The SCSEP 
provides temporary, subsidized, part-time employment assignments to 
prepare older workers for unsubsidized employment as well as to provide 
valuable community services.

Subpart A--Purpose and Definitions

What Does This Part Cover? (Sec.  641.100)
    Section 641.100 provides an overview of each subpart of the SCSEP 
regulations. As reflected in paragraph (c) the Department proposes to 
change the name of the State Plan, and to include a reference to the 
Plan's four-year strategy, both in accordance with the 2006 OAA and as 
further described in the preamble for subpart C, below. We propose to 
add a phrase to the description of subpart D to clarify that subpart D 
contains provisions relating to the grant application and 
responsibility review requirements for ``the Department's award of 
SCSEP funds for State and National grants.'' Subpart D does not apply 
to the pilot, demonstration, and evaluation grants described in subpart 
F. As is the case in the current regulations, proposed subpart F 
contains its own provision about applying for those grants (see Sec.  
641.620).
    The Department proposes to revise paragraph (f) of the overview to 
indicate that subpart F provides the rules for pilot, demonstration, 
and evaluation projects as provided at section 502(e) of

[[Page 47772]]

the 2006 OAA. These projects replace the private sector training 
projects that were authorized under section 502(e) of the 2000 OAA, 
Public Law 106-501. In paragraph (g) we propose to replace the 
reference to sanctions with a reference to corrective actions for 
failure to meet core performance measures, to mirror the language of 
the 2006 OAA (see, e.g., OAA section 513(d)). Finally, in paragraph 
(h), we describe subpart H as concerning the administrative 
requirements for SCSEP ``funds'' rather than SCSEP ``grants'' because 
many of the requirements contained in subpart H are not limited to 
grantees.
What Is the SCSEP? (Sec.  641.110)
    This section briefly describes the SCSEP. We propose to add the 
word ``unemployed'' to the description of individuals served to more 
thoroughly describe the program. In the past, grantees and applicants/
participants have asked whether a person has to be unemployed to be 
eligible for the SCSEP. Unemployed is--and has been--an eligibility 
requirement. Also, whereas in the current regulations the program 
description speaks of ``placing'' participants in ``community service 
positions,'' the Department now proposes to state that the SCSEP 
``trains'' participants in ``community service employment 
assignments.'' And, whereas the current regulations state that the 
SCSEP serves participants by ``assisting them to transition to 
unsubsidized employment,'' we propose to clarify that the SCSEP serves 
participants by ``assisting them in developing skills and experience to 
facilitate their transition to unsubsidized employment.'' We propose 
this change to provide more specificity about the services the SCSEP 
provides and how these services advance the goal of unsubsidized 
employment.
What Are the Purposes of the SCSEP? (Sec.  641.120)
    This section describes the purposes of the SCSEP, and is based on 
the statement establishing the program in section 502(a)(1) of the OAA. 
The Department proposes to revise this section in accordance with 
changes in the 2006 OAA, which rearranges the ordering of the purposes. 
In the 2006 OAA, ``foster[ing] individual economic self-sufficiency'' 
is listed first among the purposes of the SCSEP; fostering and 
promoting useful community service activities was listed first in the 
2000 OAA. We propose to amend our description accordingly. The 
Department interprets the placement of this purpose at the front of the 
list of purposes as consistent with an increased focus on placing 
participants in unsubsidized employment.
    We also propose to alter the statement of the goal concerning 
community service. The current regulations state that a purpose of the 
SCSEP is to ``foster and promote useful part-time opportunities in 
community service activities.'' We propose to change this to: ``Promote 
useful part-time opportunities in community service employment 
assignments.'' We omit the word ``foster'' from this phrase to be 
consistent with the language of the statute. Our use of the term 
community service employment assignment was discussed above, and is 
changed consistently in the rest of this proposed rule.
What Is the Scope of This Part? (Sec.  641.130)
    The proposed change in this section concerns administrative 
issuances. The current regulations indicate that administrative 
guidance and information will be provided via ``SCSEP Bulletins, 
technical assistance guides, and other SCSEP directives.'' We propose 
to revise this section to reflect the current ETA advisory system. We 
now issue administrative guidance and information for the SCSEP through 
Training and Employment Guidance Letters (TEGLs), Training and 
Employment Notices (TENs), technical assistance guides, and other SCSEP 
guidance. The Department no longer uses Older Worker Bulletins to issue 
administrative guidance; however, previously issued Bulletins that have 
not been rescinded, and have not been superseded by the 2006 OAA, are 
still in effect. All valid administrative issuances, as well as an 
abundance of other program information, may be viewed at the SCSEP Web 
site, https://www.doleta.gov/seniors.
What Definitions Apply to This Part? (Sec.  641.140)
    The Department proposes to amend several SCSEP definitions.
New Definitions
    We propose to add the following five definitions:
    Pacific Island and Asian Americans: The Department adds the 
definition of Pacific Island and Asian Americans that appears in 
section 518(a)(5) of the 2006 OAA.
    Program operator: We move the definition of ``first tier sub-
recipient'' from Sec.  641.856 to the definitions section, rename it 
``program operators,'' and expand it to make clear that it applies to 
all entities that operate a SCSEP program, not just to those entities 
that receive their funds directly from the grantee. Our intent is to 
clarify that all entities operating a SCSEP program, and not just those 
one tier down from direct SCSEP grantees, must adhere to program laws 
and regulations such as the requirement to track, record, and report 
administrative costs, and must limit those costs to comply with the 
administrative costs cap.
    Secretary: We clarify that Secretary means the Secretary of the 
Department of Labor.
    Supportive services: Section 518(a)(7) of the 2006 OAA defines 
supportive services and we adopt the statutory definition here.
    Unemployed: We adopt the definition from section 518(a)(8) of the 
2006 OAA.
Revised Definitions
    We propose to revise the following definitions:
    Authorized position level: We remove the sentence that appears at 
the end of the definition in the current regulations, which states that 
the authorized position level is calculated by dividing a grantee's 
total award by the national unit cost, because it is repetitive of 
other language in the definition.
    Community service: We revise the definition of community service to 
align more precisely with the statutory definition. We omit the opening 
phrase, ``includes, but is not limited to,'' and replace it with a 
provision at the end of the definition allowing the Secretary to 
include in the definition other services by rule as appropriate. In 
addition, we have included a lettered listing of the 2006 OAA's 
grouping of services.
    Equitable distribution report: In the phrase, ``taking the needs of 
underserved counties into account,'' we replace the word ``counties'' 
with ``jurisdictions'' to be inclusive of entities other than counties, 
such as incorporated cities, which may also be underserved.
    Grantee: We alter the list of possible entities that may serve as 
grantees to more closely follow the language of the 2006 OAA at section 
502(b)(1). Accordingly, whereas the current regulations list both 
``States'' and ``agencies of a State government'' as possible grantees, 
we now list only ``State agencies.'' Also, the 2006 OAA dropped 
language indicating that political subdivisions of a State, or a 
combination of such political subdivisions, could serve as a grantee; 
we therefore delete such language from this definition. We also modify 
the definition of grantee to eliminate the reference to section 502(e) 
grantees, since private sector training projects are

[[Page 47773]]

no longer authorized, and to make technical corrections.
    Greatest economic need: We update the citation for this definition.
    Greatest social need: We alter the definition of greatest social 
need to make technical corrections and to update the statutory 
citation.
    Host agency: The Department revises the definition of host agency 
three ways. First, we insert the word ``training'' before ``work site'' 
to underscore that the community service employment assignment is a 
venue for training SCSEP participants. We also create a stand-alone 
sentence stating that political parties cannot be host agencies, for 
clarity. Concerning political parties, we note that we interpret 
section 502(b)(1)(D) of the 2006 OAA as containing a misplaced ending 
parenthesis. As political parties are not covered by section 501(c)(3) 
of the Internal Revenue Code, we consider that the final parenthesis 
should appear after the word ``parties.'' Our interpretation here 
simply maintains the same understanding of host agencies as existed 
under the 2000 OAA--political parties cannot be host agencies, and non-
profit agencies that are 501(c)(3) may be host agencies. Finally, we 
include the word ``sectarian'' before ``religious'' to more closely 
adhere to the language of the OAA.
    Indian: We update the citation.
    Indian tribe: We insert a citation to the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act in the definition of Indian tribe, as is done in the 
statutory definition. We also update the citation.
    Individual Employment Plan or IEP: We modify the definition of 
Individual Employment Plan by moving to the beginning of the definition 
the statement that the IEP is based on an assessment of the 
participant, because that fact is fundamental to the development of an 
IEP. We have added language to acknowledge that a recent assessment or 
IEP prepared by another employment and training program may be used in 
lieu of one prepared by the grantee or sub-recipient, reflecting 
language in the statute and in Sec.  641.230, related to an assessment 
or IEP completed by the One-Stop delivery system. We delete the 
language concerning the ``appropriate sequence of services'' and add 
language referring to ``a related service strategy,'' reflecting 
language that has been added to the 2006 OAA. We add the word 
``appropriate'' before ``employment goal'' to indicate that the 
employment goal should be one that reflects the assessment of the 
skills, talents, and training needs of the individual, and may need to 
be modified over time. We replace the phrase, ``achievement of 
objectives,'' with the phrase, ``objectives that lead to the goal,'' 
for increased clarity. We have added ``a timeline for the achievement 
of the objectives'' because we believe it is useful for the IEP to 
include target timeframes for the achievement of the identified 
objectives. We also make grammatical changes.
    Jobs for Veterans Act: We revise the definition of the Jobs for 
Veterans Act to clarify that the Jobs for Veterans Act is a distinct 
statute from the priority of service provision in the OAA, although we 
use the definition of veteran contained in the Jobs for Veterans Act to 
determine which participants qualify for the veterans' priority for 
service (Sec.  641.520). We also modify the description of which 
participants qualify for the veterans' preference to more closely 
follow the language of the Jobs for Veterans Act.
    OAA: We revise the definition of the Older Americans Act (OAA) to 
account for all amendments.
    Other participant (enrollee) costs: We revise the definition of 
other participant (enrollee) costs to make certain technical 
corrections, we replace the phrase ``supportive services to assist'' 
with ``supportive services to enable,'' to track the language of the 
statute, and we clarify that training costs may be incurred prior to 
commencing or concurrent with a community service employment 
assignment.
    Participant: We revise the definition of participant to clarify 
that an individual must be given a community service employment 
assignment to be considered a SCSEP participant, though the person need 
not have begun that assignment to be considered a SCSEP participant. 
This change makes it possible for participants to get paid their hourly 
wage for time spent on activities such as orientation and training 
before they begin working at their community service employment 
assignment.
    Poor employment prospects: The phrase ``poor employment prospects'' 
appeared in the 2000 OAA and the Department defines it in the 2004 
SCSEP final rule. The Department used the definition of poor employment 
prospects in the current regulations as the basis for developing this 
revised definition which provides that a person with poor employment 
prospects is one who has a significant barrier to employment. The 
barriers listed in the definition are mainly the same characteristics 
that appear in this definition in the current regulations, but with 
minor changes to reduce redundancy. The Department interprets the 2006 
OAA's term ``poor employment prospects'' to have the same meaning as 
the similar phrase which also appears in the 2006 OAA, ``low employment 
prospects.'' Thus, the same definition is used for the term low 
employment prospects, which is also part of this section, but was 
published in the Senior Community Service Employment Program; 
Performance Accountability IFR at 72 FR 35832, Jun. 29, 2007.
    Program Year: We alter the definition of Program Year to remove the 
statutory reference which no longer exists and to add the word ``on'' 
before ``July 1.'' The substance of the definition is not affected by 
these changes.
    Project: We revise the definition of project for increased 
readability, to remove the unnecessary phrase, ``in a particular 
location within a State,'' and to make technical corrections. We also 
change the phrase, ``community service'' to ``service to communities'' 
in light of the Sense of Congress provision at section 516 of the 2006 
OAA which indicates that one benefit of SCSEP projects is their impact 
on communities.
    Recipient: We make technical corrections to the definition of 
recipient.
    Service area: We revise the definition of service area by adding 
the clarifying phrase, ``in accordance with a grant agreement,'' for 
increased accuracy.
    State grantee: We revise the definition of State grantee by adding 
the phrase, ``or the highest government official,'' after the word 
``Governor,'' to account for those governmental jurisdictions that 
receive State SCSEP grants but do not have a Governor.
    State Plan: We revise the definition of State Plan to specify that 
the State Plan now includes a four-year strategy for, and describes the 
planning and implementation process for, the statewide provision of 
SCSEP services, in accordance with section 503(a)(1) of the 2006 OAA.
    Sub-recipient: Although in the current regulations the Department 
treats the terms sub-grantee and sub-recipient as synonymous, we now 
clarify that sub-recipient is the preferred term to use when referring 
to entities that receive SCSEP funds from grantees. Not all entities 
that receive SCSEP funds from grantees do so pursuant to a grant; in 
some cases the mechanism is a contract. Because the term sub-recipient 
is inclusive of both sub-grantees and sub-contractors, we do not 
provide separate definitions for these terms. The definition of sub-
recipient that we employ is largely the same as the definition of sub-
grantee that appears in the current regulations; we deleted one phrase 
referring to subcontracts because the definition now includes all 
varieties of sub-awards.

[[Page 47774]]

    Title V of the OAA: We revise the definition of title V of the OAA 
to account for all amendments.
    Tribal organization: We update the citation.
    Workforce Investment Act (WIA): We clarify in the definition of the 
Workforce Investment Act that references to this law include any and 
all amendments, and we make technical corrections to the citations.
Deleted Definitions
    The Department proposes to omit several definitions that appear in 
the current regulations. First, we remove definitions of ``placement 
into public or private unsubsidized employment'' and ``retention in 
public or private unsubsidized employment'' because those performance 
measures no longer exist. They were replaced in the IFR by the common 
measures entry and six-months retention indicators. We also eliminate 
the definition of co-enrollment because it related to private sector 
502(e) projects which are no longer authorized. We eliminate the 
definition of State workforce agency because that phrase no longer 
appears in this rule. Finally, we remove the definition of sub-grantee 
and replace it with the more technically accurate term: ``sub-
recipient.''
Unchanged Definitions
    Definitions that remain unchanged are not reprinted.
    The Department added and amended some SCSEP definitions related to 
performance accountability in the SCSEP; Performance Accountability; 
IFR, 72 FR 35832, Jun. 29, 2007. Those new and amended definitions do 
not appear in this proposed rule, and comments on those amendments were 
sought in the IFR.

Subpart B--Coordination With the Workforce Investment Act

    This subpart covers those provisions of the OAA that require 
coordination with WIA. Please note that WIA contains additional 
provisions that are relevant to the SCSEP. The 2006 OAA requires 
changes to Sec.  641.240 of this part. In addition, the Department 
proposes several clarifying changes to the regulatory text.
What Is the Relationship Between the SCSEP and the Workforce Investment 
Act? (Sec.  641.200)
    The only proposed changes we make in this section are to clarify 
that sub-recipients (and not just grantees) are included in the 
requirement to follow all WIA rules and regulations, and to make 
certain technical corrections to the citations.
What Services, in Addition to the Applicable Core Services, Must SCSEP 
Grantees/Sub-Recipients Provide Through the One-Stop Delivery System? 
(Sec.  641.210)
    This section requires SCSEP grantees and sub-recipients to make 
arrangements to provide their participants, eligible individuals the 
grantees/sub-recipients are unable to serve, as well as SCSEP 
ineligible individuals, with access to other services available at the 
One-Stop Career Center. There is no change to this section other than 
two proposed clarifications. First, the Department clarifies that core 
services are those defined in the WIA regulations at Sec.  662.240 of 
this title. Second, we also clarify that, in addition to providing 
eligible and ineligible individuals with access to other activities and 
programs carried out by other One-Stop partners as is provided in the 
current regulations, SCSEP grantees/sub-recipients must also make 
arrangements through the One-Stop Delivery System to provide eligible 
and ineligible individuals with referrals to WIA intensive and training 
services. As a required One-Stop partner, and in light of the statutory 
language in both WIA and title V of the 2006 OAA on the cross-use of 
individual assessments, it is desirable that SCSEP grantees and sub-
recipients make appropriate referrals to the One-Stop system for 
intensive and training services.
Does Title I of WIA Require the SCSEP To Use OAA Funds for Individuals 
Who Are Not Eligible for SCSEP Services or for Services That Are Not 
Authorized Under the OAA? (Sec.  641.220)
    This section states that even in the One-Stop Career Center 
environment, SCSEP projects are limited to serving SCSEP-eligible 
individuals.
    As discussed in the preamble section addressing SCSEP definitions 
(Sec.  641.140), the Department is proposing to revise the definition 
of participant to clarify that an individual must be given a community 
service employment assignment, though the person need not have begun 
that assignment, to be considered a SCSEP participant. Because of this 
proposed modification, we change the language, ``are functioning in a 
community service assignment,'' which had qualified the word 
participants, to ``have each received a community service employment 
assignment.'' We also propose to add language clarifying what an MOU 
is, and propose to cross-reference the WIA regulatory provisions that 
relate to the MOU.
Must the Individual Assessment Conducted by the SCSEP Grantee/Sub-
Recipient and the Assessment Performed by the One-Stop Delivery System 
Be Accepted for Use by Either Entity To Determine the Individual's Need 
for Services in the SCSEP and Adult Programs Under Title I-B of WIA? 
(Sec.  641.230)
    The only proposed changes the Department makes to this section are 
technical ones. We add the word ``sub-recipient'' to the heading for 
clarity. We also change the citation to the OAA to reflect the 2006 
Amendments, and move the citation to after the first sentence, as the 
first sentence contains the provision located in the cited statutory 
section.
Are SCSEP Participants Eligible for Intensive and Training Services 
Under Title I of WIA? (Sec.  641.240)
    This section addresses the eligibility of SCSEP participants for 
intensive and training services under title I of WIA. Under the OAA, 
SCSEP participants are not automatically eligible to receive intensive 
and training services under WIA, however Local Boards have the 
authority to deem SCSEP participants eligible to receive intensive and 
training services under title I of WIA. We note that WIA eligibility is 
not based on income except in the adult program when a local area 
determines that its funds are insufficient and provides priority to 
low-income individuals. Rather, WIA eligibility is based on the need 
for and utility of intensive and training services to obtain 
employment.
    The Department proposes to revise paragraph (a) by removing the 
opening word ``yes'' since it could be read to imply that SCSEP 
participants are automatically eligible for intensive and training 
services under title I of WIA, even though the subsequent text states 
the contrary.
    In paragraph (b) the Department proposes to make several changes. 
First, the current regulations state that, ``SCSEP participants who 
have been assessed through a SCSEP IEP have received an intensive 
service.'' An assessment is used in developing an IEP, but assessments 
are not accomplished through an IEP. Accordingly, to clarify the 
distinct roles of the assessment and the IEP, the phrase is proposed to 
read, ``SCSEP participants who have been assessed and for whom an IEP 
has been developed have received an intensive service.''
    Also in paragraph (b), we propose to revise the sentence addressing 
SCSEP

[[Page 47775]]

participants and training. Whereas the current regulations state, 
``SCSEP participants who seek unsubsidized employment as part of their 
SCSEP IEP, may require training to meet their objectives,'' the 
proposed rule instead says, ``[i]n order to enhance skill development 
related to the IEP, it may be necessary to provide training beyond the 
community service employment assignment to enable the participant to 
meet their unsubsidized employment objectives.'' We propose this change 
to reinforce the role of the IEP, because unsubsidized employment is a 
goal for all of the SCSEP, not just certain participants, and to 
clarify that the training under discussion here is training other than 
that accomplished via the community service employment assignment. We 
also propose to add a reference to Sec.  641.540, the section of these 
regulations that addresses participant training in depth.
    The Department proposes to delete what is paragraph (c) in the 
current regulations; the Department determined this paragraph conflicts 
with other relevant regulatory provisions. Paragraph (c) states that 
community service employment assignments are analogous to work 
experience activities or intensive services under WIA. This paragraph 
could create confusion with paragraph (a) of this section, which 
correctly states that SCSEP participants are not automatically eligible 
for WIA intensive and training services. Whether or not a community 
service employment assignment is considered to be an intensive service, 
a SCSEP participant must still meet the other WIA eligibility 
requirements to be eligible for training services.
    The Department also proposes to delete what is paragraph (d) in the 
current regulations because the subject of that paragraph is thoroughly 
covered in subpart E. Paragraph (d) indicates that SCSEP participants 
may be paid while receiving intensive or training services. An 
explanation of participant wages appears in Sec.  641.565 of these 
regulations.

Subpart C--The State Plan

    The Department proposes to change the title of this subpart to 
reflect a change in the name of the State Plan in the 2006 OAA from the 
prior term, the ``State Senior Employment Services Coordination Plan.'' 
This subpart of the regulations implements the new provisions in 
section 503 of the 2006 OAA, which direct the Governor, or the highest 
government official, of each State to submit a State Plan that contains 
a four-year strategy, and require that the State Plan be updated at 
least every two years. As reflected in these proposed regulations, the 
State Plan now has a broader role than merely coordination.
    Comments are welcome on requirements for the four-year strategy, as 
well as other changes affecting the State Plan that are identified in 
this preamble or other changes to the current regulations which flow 
from the 2006 Amendments.
What Is the State Plan? (Sec.  641.300)
    This section describes the State Plan and emphasizes that it is 
intended to foster collaboration among SCSEP stakeholders. As noted 
above, the Department proposes to change the name of the State Plan to 
reflect the 2006 OAA. We also propose to add language reflecting the 
new requirement that the State Plan outline a four-year strategy for 
the statewide provision of community service and other authorized 
activities for eligible individuals under the SCSEP. The four-year 
strategy is one component of the State Plan; Sec.  641.325 of these 
proposed regulations specifies additional information required in the 
State Plan.
What Is a Four-Year Strategy? (Sec.  641.302)
    The 2006 OAA requires that States include a four-year strategy in 
the State Plan; in this proposed section, the Department explains what 
States must include in their four-year strategy. The four-year strategy 
is only one component of the State Plan; other elements are discussed 
in Sec.  641.325 of these regulations. The 2006 OAA does not elaborate 
on the contents of the four-year strategy, but grants the Secretary 
authority to determine what provisions should be in the State Plan, 
consistent with title V. These proposed regulations specify what States 
must include in the four-year strategy.
    The Department views the four-year strategy as an opportunity for 
the State to take a longer-term view of the SCSEP in the State, 
including its role in workforce development, given projected changes in 
the State's demographics (particularly the number of older workers), 
economy, and labor market. In preparing the four-year strategy, the 
State should address the role of SCSEP vis-[aacute]-vis other workforce 
programs and initiatives as well as other programs serving older 
workers, and how the State and SCSEP grantees can utilize these other 
programs to maximize the services available to the SCSEP-eligible 
population. The four-year strategy also should be used by the State to 
examine and, as appropriate, plan longer-term changes to the design of 
the program within the State, such as changes in the utilization of 
SCSEP grantees and program operators to better achieve the goals of the 
program.
    To achieve the objectives described above, the Department proposes 
to require that the four-year strategy include the following specific 
elements. First, it must explain the State's long-term plan for 
achieving an equitable distribution of SCSEP positions within the State 
(the equitable distribution report, discussed in Sec. Sec.  641.360 and 
641.365, addresses this for the short-term). This information is 
required as part of the State Plan (see Sec.  641.325), but the State 
should address equitable distribution over a longer period in its four-
year strategy. The strategy must specifically address how, over the 
four-year period, the State intends to: (1) Move positions from over-
served to underserved locations within the State, pursuant to Sec.  
641.365 of these regulations; (2) equitably serve rural and urban 
areas; and (3) serve individuals afforded priority for community 
service employment and other authorized activities, pursuant to Sec.  
641.520 of these regulations. Second, a related provision requires that 
the State explain its long-term strategy for avoiding disruptions to 
the program when new Census data that affects the distribution of SCSEP 
positions across the State becomes available, or when there is over-
enrollment for any other reason. This information is included in the 
State Plan for the short-term, but the State should plan over a longer 
term for avoidance of disruptions when new Census data become available 
or there is over-enrollment.
    Third, the four-year strategy must provide the State's long-term 
plan for serving minority older individuals under the SCSEP. Section 
515 of the 2006 OAA requires a report on services to minority 
individuals, and this element in the four-year strategy reinforces the 
law's focus on minority individuals and will provide information that 
may be used in the report. Fourth, the strategy must provide long-term 
projections for job growth in industries and occupations in the State 
that may provide employment opportunities for older workers, and how 
those relate to the types of unsubsidized jobs for which participants 
will be trained, and the types of skill training to be provided. The 
2006 OAA added to the State Plan provisions the current and projected 
employment opportunities in the State, and it makes sense to look at 
this, in relation to the types of skill training provided to 
participants, not only in the

[[Page 47776]]

short-term, but over the longer-term encompassed by the four-year 
strategy.
    Fifth, the four-year strategy must explain how the State plans to 
work with employers in the State to develop and promote opportunities 
for placement of SCSEP participants in unsubsidized employment. Working 
with employers to develop opportunities for placement of SCSEP 
participants in unsubsidized employment is an essential element of the 
program and necessary to achieve participation limits, so States should 
address this in their four-year strategy.
    Sixth, the four-year strategy must provide the long-term strategy 
for increasing the level of performance for entry into unsubsidized 
employment by SCSEP participants. Specifically, the strategy must 
demonstrate how the State will achieve the minimum levels of 
performance required by section 513(a)(2)(E)(ii) of the OAA and Sec.  
641.720(a)(6) of the SCSEP regulations (published in the IFR), which 
set forth the minimum percentage for the expected level of performance 
for entry into unsubsidized employment for each of fiscal years 2007-
2011. The expected level of performance on this core indicator 
increases over this time period, from 21 percent in fiscal year 2007, 
to 25 percent in fiscal year 2011. The Department recognizes that these 
are minimum levels and that some grantees already perform well above 
these minimum levels. All grantees should strive to continuously 
improve their performance levels to assist enrollees in becoming self-
sufficient, make available opportunities for other individuals to 
enroll in SCSEP, and better fulfill the objectives of the program.
    Seventh, the four-year strategy must indicate how the SCSEP 
activities of grantees will be coordinated with a number of other 
programs, initiatives, and entities. The State Plan must address 
coordination with WIA, but States should plan over a longer term to 
improve coordination with a variety of other programs, initiatives, and 
entities. These include: (1) Planned actions to coordinate with 
activities being carried out in the State under title I of WIA, 
including plans for utilizing the WIA One-Stop Delivery System and its 
partners to serve individuals aged 55 and older; (2) planned actions to 
coordinate with activities being carried out in the State under other 
titles of the OAA; (3) planned actions to coordinate with other public 
and private entities and programs that provide services to older 
Americans in the State (such as community and faith-based 
organizations, transportation programs, and programs for those with 
special needs or disabilities); and (4) planned actions to coordinate 
with other labor market and job training initiatives. These initiatives 
currently include the President's High Growth Job Training Initiative, 
Community-Based Job Training Grants, and the Workforce Innovation in 
Regional Economic Development (WIRED) Initiative.
    Eighth, the State should explain its long-term strategy to improve 
SCSEP services, and may include recommendations to the Department, as 
appropriate. This is derived from current State Plan Instructions 
(Older Worker Bulletin 01-04), which specify that the State Plan may 
include recommendations to the Secretary of Labor on actions to be 
taken by SCSEP grantees in the State to improve SCSEP services. The 
recommendations may include such topics as the location of positions, 
the types of community services, the time required to make changes in 
the distribution of positions, and the types of participants to be 
enrolled.
Who Is Responsible for Developing and Submitting the State Plan? (Sec.  
641.305)
    The only change we propose to this section is to add the phrase, 
``or the highest government official,'' after the word ``Governor'', to 
be inclusive of all jurisdictions that submit State Plans.
May the Governor, or the Highest Government Official, Delegate 
Responsibility for Developing and Submitting the State Plan? (Sec.  
641.310)
    The only proposed change to this provision is to add in the heading 
the phrase, ``or the highest government official,'' after the word, 
``Governor,'' to be inclusive of jurisdictions where the head of the 
government is not a Governor.
Who Participates in Developing the State Plan? (Sec.  641.315)
    This provision lists the individuals and organizations from whom 
the Governor, or the highest government official, is required to seek 
advice and recommendations related to the State Plan, in accordance 
with section 503(a)(2) of the OAA. The 2006 OAA changes the task of the 
Governor (or highest government official) from ``obtaining'' the advice 
and recommendations of these entities to ``seeking'' advice and 
recommendations. The Department therefore proposes to revise this 
section to use the word ``seek.'' We interpret this to mean that the 
Governor (or highest government official) must make a good faith effort 
to obtain advice and recommendations from the listed individuals and 
organizations, whether or not each of these chooses to submit its 
views. We also propose to replace the phrase ``underserved older 
individuals'' with ``unemployed older individuals,'' in accordance with 
the same change in the 2006 OAA.
Must All National Grantees Operating Within a State Participate in the 
State Planning Process? (Sec.  641.320)
    Section 503(a)(2) of the OAA requires the Governor, or the highest 
government official, to seek the advice and recommendations of a number 
of different parties concerning SCSEP services in the State. Although 
that particular section of the OAA does not require national grantees 
to participate in the State Plan process, section 514(c)(6) of the OAA 
establishes that when selecting national grantees, the Department must 
consider an applicant's ability to coordinate their activities with 
other organizations at the State and local levels. The State Plan is 
the process by which SCSEP services are coordinated at the State level; 
accordingly, section 514(c)(6) effectively requires national grantees 
to participate in the State planning process. To clarify the source of 
this requirement, the Department proposes to omit the language 
referring to OAA section 503(a)(2) from paragraph (a) of this section. 
We have also updated the remaining citation in paragraph (a) to account 
for where this provision is located in the 2006 OAA.
    Paragraph (b) concerns exemptions from the requirement in paragraph 
(a); we propose several changes to this paragraph. The 2004 SCSEP final 
rule exempts national grantees serving older American Indians from the 
State planning process, based on section 503(a)(8) of the 2000 OAA, 
although the Department encourages their participation. The proposed 
regulation adds grantees serving older Pacific Island and Asian 
Americans to the grantee exemption from the requirement to participate 
in the State planning process, consistent with section 503(a)(8) of the 
2006 OAA. However, the Department continues to encourage exempted 
grantees to participate in the State planning process in the areas in 
which they operate. Also in paragraph (b), we propose to change the 
phrase, ``are exempted from participating in the planning 
requirements'' to ``are exempted from the requirement to participate in 
the State planning processes,'' for clarity.
    The Department proposes to clarify in paragraph (b) that the 
exemption from the requirement to participate in the

[[Page 47777]]

State planning process applies to grantees using funds specifically 
reserved for projects serving older American Indians and older Pacific 
Island and Asian Americans under OAA section 506(a)(3); this 
clarification is consistent with section 503(a)(8) of the 2006 OAA. We 
also propose to add new language concerning a grantee using both 
reserved and non-reserved funds. All grantees of non-reserved SCSEP 
funds, including grantees that have also received reserved funds, are 
required to participate in the State planning process per paragraph 
(a). Having applied for and accepted non-reserved funds, grantees 
become subject to the same coordination requirements as all other 
recipients of non-reserved funds. Accordingly, if a grantee that 
receives reserved funds under one grant is also awarded a non-reserved 
funds grant, the grantee is required to participate in the State 
planning process for purposes of the non-reserved funds grant.
    Finally, we propose to delete from paragraph (b) the statement that 
if an exempt grantee chooses not to participate in the State planning 
process it is required to describe its plan for serving its 
constituency in its grant application. This is redundant because all 
grant applications require applicants to describe such plans, 
regardless of past participation in the State planning process. We also 
make certain grammatical improvements.
What Information Must Be Provided in the State Plan? (Sec.  641.325)
    This section lists the minimum requirements of the State Plan, 
consistent with section 503(a)(4) of the OAA. In the opening sentences 
of the proposed section we add a requirement that the State Plan 
include the State's four-year strategy, as required by section 
503(a)(1) of the 2006 OAA and as described in Sec.  641.302.
    Paragraph (a) remains unchanged. In paragraph (b), we propose to 
add a requirement that the State Plan provide information on the 
relative distribution of eligible individuals who are limited English 
proficient as required by 2006 OAA section 503 (a)(4)(C)(iii). In 
paragraph (c), we propose to replace the requirement to identify and 
address ``the employment situations and the types of skills possessed 
by eligible individuals,'' which appears in the current regulations, 
with a new requirement stemming from a revised section 503(a)(4)(D) of 
the 2006 OAA, that the plan provide information on the current and 
projected employment opportunities in the State (such as by providing 
employment statistics available under section 15 of the Wagner-Peyser 
Act (29 U.S.C. 491-2) by occupation) and the type of skills possessed 
by local eligible individuals. State labor market information is 
available through the following link to America's Career Information 
Network: https://www.acinet.org/acinet/crl/
library.aspx?PostVal=10&CATID=52. We propose to make these changes in 
accordance with the same changes in the 2006 OAA.
    Paragraph (d) currently requires a description of the localities 
and populations for which community service projects in the State are 
most needed. We propose to change this paragraph by removing the words, 
``community service'' before the word ``projects'' to follow the same 
change in section 503(a)(4)(E) the 2006 OAA.
    We propose a slight modification to paragraph (e). Instead of 
requiring that the State Plan include actions taken ``or'' planned 
concerning coordination with WIA, we require the Plan to include 
actions taken ``and/or'' planned to capture actions already taken in 
addition to those being planned.
    What appears as paragraph (f) in the current regulations is moved 
to paragraph (g), and we propose a new paragraph (f), which would 
require that the State Plan describe the process used to seek advice 
and recommendations on the State Plan from representatives of 
organizations and individuals listed in Sec.  641.315, and the process 
used to seek advice and recommendations on steps to coordinate SCSEP 
services with activities funded under title I of WIA from 
representatives of organizations listed in Sec.  641.335. Since the 
2006 OAA requires that advice and recommendations be sought from 
representatives of these organizations and individuals, the Department 
believes it is reasonable for the State Plan to describe how this input 
was obtained.
    Proposed paragraph (g) mirrors what is paragraph (f) in the current 
regulations, and requires the State Plan to describe the planning 
process, including opportunities for public comment. The only change to 
this paragraph is that we propose to add a reference to Sec.  641.350, 
which requires the State to solicit public comments.
    There is no change to the text of what appears as paragraph (g) in 
the current regulations, although it appears as paragraph (h) here. The 
paragraph that is labeled (h) in the current regulations is labeled 
paragraph (i) here; the only change is that the reference to Sec.  
641.365 has been taken out of parentheses. Finally, the text that 
appears as paragraph (i) in the current regulations is repeated 
verbatim here although it is now labeled paragraph (j).
How Should the State Plan Reflect Community Service Needs? (Sec.  
641.330)
    There is no change to this provision.
How Should the Governor, or the Highest Government Official, Address 
the Coordination of SCSEP Services With Activities Funded Under Title I 
of WIA? (Sec.  641.335)
    The only proposed change to this provision is to add in the heading 
the phrase, ``or the highest government official,'' after the word, 
``Governor,'' to be inclusive of jurisdictions where the head of the 
government is not a Governor.
How Often Must the Governor, or the Highest Government Official, Update 
the State Plan? (Sec.  641.340)
    The Department proposes to reword the heading question for this 
section because the former heading assumed an annual review of the 
State Plan, which is no longer required under the 2006 OAA, and to 
include the phrase, ``or the highest government official,'' to be 
inclusive of jurisdictions for which the head of the government is not 
a Governor. Instead, the 2006 OAA requires that the State Plan be 
reviewed, updated, and submitted to the Secretary not less often than 
every two years. The Department revises the proposed section to reflect 
the new requirement. We encourage States to review their State Plan 
more frequently than every two years, and make necessary adjustments 
and submit modifications as circumstances warrant. The Department 
intends for the State Plan to be a living document that will guide the 
strategic and ongoing operations of the SCSEP within the State. Prior 
to submitting an update of the State Plan to the Department the 
Governor, or highest government official, must seek the advice and 
recommendations of the individuals and organizations identified in 
Sec.  641.315 about what, if any, changes are needed, and publish the 
State Plan, showing the changes, for public comment.
    We also propose to add cites to corresponding statutory provisions.
What Are the Requirements for Modifying the State Plan? (Sec.  641.345)
    The Department proposes a new paragraph (a) to distinguish State 
Plan updates from State Plan modifications; the remaining paragraphs 
have been re-designated. Whereas States are required to update their 
State Plan not less often than every two years, modifications may be 
submitted anytime circumstances

[[Page 47778]]

warrant. Both updates and modifications require an opportunity for the 
public to comment on the State Plan, but only in the event of a State 
Plan update (Sec.  641.340) are States required to seek the advice and 
comment of the individuals and organizations identified in Sec.  
641.315.
    Paragraph (b), which is labeled paragraph (a) in the current 
regulations, addresses what circumstances require a modification to the 
State Plan. The only changes we propose in paragraph (b) are changing 
the word ``strategies'' to ``four-year strategy,'' and adding the word 
``significant'' before the word ``changes.'' We propose the latter 
change to clarify that trivial changes do not warrant a modification to 
the State Plan.
    In paragraph (c) we state that modifications to the State Plan must 
be open for public comment. We propose to delete a reference to Sec.  
641.325 from this paragraph because that section merely lists the 
required contents of the State Plan. We propose to leave intact the 
reference to Sec.  641.350 which addresses soliciting public comment on 
the State Plan. In paragraph (d) we clarify that States need not seek 
the advice and recommendations of the individuals and organizations 
identified in Sec.  641.315 when modifying the State Plan.
    Paragraph (e), which appears as paragraph (c) in the current 
regulations, remains unchanged.
How Should Public Comments Be Solicited and Collected? (Sec.  641.350)
    There is no change to this provision.
Who May Comment on the State Plan? (Sec.  641.355)
    There is no change to this provision.
How Does the State Plan Relate to the Equitable Distribution Report? 
(Sec.  641.360)
    The equitable distribution report shows where SCSEP positions are 
located throughout a State on a grantee-by-grantee basis and is 
required by section 508 of the OAA. State grantees are responsible for 
preparing the report at the beginning of each fiscal year. SCSEP 
grantees use the equitable distribution report to improve on the 
distribution of SCSEP positions within the State. The information 
contained in the equitable distribution report is used in preparing the 
State Plan; however, the State Plan requires additional information. 
This section is substantively the same as in the current regulations, 
but the Department proposes to change the reference to the State Plan 
to reflect the statutory requirement, new to the 2006 OAA, that the 
Plan be updated and sent to the Secretary not less often than every two 
years, whereas in the current regulations we reference annual State 
Plans. The Department also proposes to remove redundant language 
concerning the role of the equitable distribution report.
How Must the Equitable Distribution Provisions Be Reconciled With the 
Provision That Disruptions to Current Participants Should Be Avoided? 
(Sec.  641.365)
    This section is largely the same as in the current regulations, but 
since the 2006 OAA places time limits on participation in the SCSEP, 
the Department proposes to revise this section to provide a cross-
reference to Sec.  641.570 of these regulations, where the new time 
limit is addressed. We propose to remove the reference to Sec.  641.575 
because limits set on the amount of time a participant spends in a 
particular community service employment assignment do not affect the 
distribution of SCSEP positions. We also propose to rephrase the first 
sentence, concerning avoiding disruptions in services, for greater 
clarity. Finally, we make several grammatical and technical 
corrections.

Subpart D--Grant Application and Responsibility Review Requirements for 
State and National SCSEP Grants

    This subpart covers the grant application, eligibility, and award 
requirements for all SCSEP grants under section 506 of the 2006 OAA, 
which describes distribution of assistance to State and national 
grantees. The Department proposes to change the title of this subpart 
to clarify that this subpart applies to National and State grants, but 
not the pilot, demonstration, and evaluation grants described in 
subpart F.
    The proposed changes in this subpart support an increased emphasis 
on the grantees' accountability for results in order to achieve 
enhanced program performance. This subpart describes organizations 
eligible to apply for SCSEP grants, application requirements, 
eligibility criteria, responsibility reviews, and how the Department 
will select grantees. Comments are welcome on the new and revised grant 
application, eligibility, and award requirements that are discussed in 
this preamble or other changes to this subpart which flow from the 2006 
OAA.
What Entities Are Eligible To Apply to the Department for Funds To 
Administer SCSEP Projects? (Sec.  641.400)
    The Department proposes to delete ``community service'' from the 
heading question of this section to be consistent with the rest of 
these regulations which generally refer simply to ``SCSEP projects.''
    Section 502