Notice of Waivers Granted Under Section 9401 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as Amended, 22909-22913 [E9-11413]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 93 / Friday, May 15, 2009 / Notices
the verification documentation to eApplication are in the application package
for this competition.
(B) Tiebreaker for Development
Grants. In tie-breaking situations for
development grants described in 34 CFR
606.23(b), the HSI Program regulations
require that we award one additional
point to an application from an IHE that
has an endowment fund of which the
current market value, per FTE enrolled
student, is less than the average current
market value of the endowment funds,
per FTE enrolled student, at comparable
institutions that offer similar
instruction. We also award one
additional point to an application from
an IHE that had expenditures for library
materials per FTE enrolled student that
are less than the average expenditures
for library materials per FTE enrolled
student at comparable institutions that
offer similar instruction.
For the purpose of these funding
considerations, we use 2006–2007 data.
If a tie remains after applying the
tiebreaker mechanism above, priority
will be given (a) for Individual
Development Grants, to applicants that
addressed the statutory priority found in
section 521(d) of the HEA, as amended;
and (b) for Cooperative Arrangement
Development Grants, to applicants in
accordance with section 524(b) of the
HEA, under which the Secretary
determines that the cooperative
arrangement is geographically and
economically sound or will benefit the
applicant HSI.
If a tie still remains after applying the
additional point(s), and the relevant
statutory priority, we will determine the
ranking of applicants based on the
lowest endowment values per FTE
enrolled student.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application
is successful, we notify your U.S.
Representative and U.S. Senators and
send you a Grant Award Notification
(GAN). We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or
not selected for funding, we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy
Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy
requirements in the application package
and reference these and other
requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining
the terms and conditions of an award in
the Applicable Regulations section of
this notice and include these and other
specific conditions in the GAN. The
GAN also incorporates your approved
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:43 May 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Reporting: At the end of your
project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial
information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multi-year
award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the
most current performance and financial
expenditure information as directed by
the Secretary in 34 CFR 75.118, 34 CFR
75.720 and in 34 CFR 606.31.
4. Performance Measures: The
Secretary has established the following
key performance measures for assessing
the effectiveness of the HSI Program: (1)
The percentage change, over the fiveyear grant period, of the number of fulltime degree-seeking undergraduate
students enrolled at HSIs. (2) The
percentage of first-time, full-time
degree-seeking undergraduate students
who were in their first year of
postsecondary enrollment in the
previous year and are enrolled in the
current year at the same Hispanicserving institution. (3) The percentage of
first-time, full-time degree-seeking
undergraduate students who were in
their first year of postsecondary
enrollment in the previous year and are
enrolled in the current year at the same
four-year Hispanic-serving institution.
(4) The percentage of first-time, fulltime degree-seeking undergraduate
students who were in their first year of
postsecondary enrollment in the
previous year and are enrolled in the
current year at the same two-year
Hispanic-serving institution. (5) The
percentage of first-time, full-time
degree-seeking undergraduate students
enrolled at four-year HSIs graduating
within six years of enrollment. (6) The
percentage of first-time, full-time
degree-seeking undergraduate students
enrolled at two-year HSIs graduating
within three years of enrollment. (7)
Federal cost per undergraduate and
graduate degree at institutions in the
Developing HSIs program.
VII. Agency Contacts
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carnisia M. Proctor, U.S. Department of
Education, 1990 K Street, NW., 6th
Floor, Washington, DC 20006–8513.
Telephone: (202) 502–7606 or by e-mail:
Carnisia.Proctor@ed.gov.
If you use TDD, call the FRS, toll free,
at 1–800–877–8339.
VIII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities may obtain this document in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or computer diskette)
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22909
on request to the program contact
person listed in this section.
Electronic Access to This Document:
You may view this document, as well as
all other documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF) 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.
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.
Delegation of Authority: The Secretary
of Education has delegated authority to
Daniel T. Madzelan, Director,
Forecasting and Policy Analysis for the
Office of Postsecondary Education to
perform the functions of the Assistant
Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
Dated: May 12, 2009.
Daniel T. Madzelan,
Director, Forecasting and Policy Analysis.
[FR Doc. E9–11414 Filed 5–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Notice of Waivers Granted Under
Section 9401 of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as
Amended
SUMMARY: In this notice, we announce
the waivers that the U.S. Department of
Education (Department) granted during
calendar year 2008 under the waiver
authority in section 9401 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended.
In 2008, the Department granted a
total of 51 waivers under the ESEA
section 9401 waiver authority. The
waivers granted were as follows: (1)
Four waivers related to Hurricanes
Katrina, Rita, and Ike; (2) two new
waivers allowing implementation of the
‘‘growth model pilot,’’ and nine
extensions of existing waivers to
continue implementation of a ‘‘growth
model pilot’’; (3) six new waivers
allowing implementation of the
‘‘differentiated accountability model
pilot’’; (4) one new waiver and four
continuations of existing waivers
allowing local educational agencies
(LEAs) in need of improvement to be
E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM
15MYN1
22910
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 93 / Friday, May 15, 2009 / Notices
eligible to apply to their State
educational agency (SEA) to become
supplemental educational services (SES)
providers; (5) four new waivers and
three continuations of existing waivers
allowing LEAs to provide SES to eligible
students attending schools that receive
funding under Title I, Part A of the
ESEA (Title I schools) and are in the
first year of school improvement; (6) one
Title I schoolwide eligibility waiver; (7)
one Title I, Part A within-district
allocation waiver; (8) one waiver of the
ESEA transferability rules; (9) one
‘‘local-flex’’ waiver; (10) four waivers to
the Consolidated Grants restrictions;
and (11) ten waivers allowing recipients
of funds under the Indian Education
program to charge additional
administrative costs to the program.
Waiver Data:
Waivers Related to Hurricanes Katrina,
Rita, and Ike
1. Waiver Applicant: Louisiana
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Tydings
Amendment, section 421(b) of the
General Education Provisions Act
(GEPA).
• Date waiver granted: May 6, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
until September 30, 2009 the period of
availability for fiscal year 2006 funds for
all programs authorized under the
ESEA.
2. Waiver Applicant: Mississippi
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Tydings
Amendment, section 421(b) of GEPA.
• Date waiver granted: October 7,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
until September 30, 2009 the period of
availability for fiscal year 2006 Title II,
Part A funds.
3. Waiver Applicant: Mississippi
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Tydings
Amendment, section 421(b) of GEPA.
• Date waiver granted: October 7,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
until September 30, 2009 the period of
availability for fiscal year 2006 Title I,
Part B, Subpart 1 funds.
4. Waiver Applicant: Texas Education
Agency.
• Provision waived: Tydings
Amendment, section 421(b) of GEPA.
• Date waiver granted: October 9,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
until September 30, 2009 the period of
availability for fiscal year 2006 Title I,
Part B, Subpart 1 funds.
II. ‘‘Growth Model Pilots’’
New Applicants:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:43 May 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
1. Waiver Applicant: Michigan
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: June 10, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
Michigan the flexibility to implement a
growth-based accountability model as
part of determining adequate yearly
progress (AYP) beginning in the 2007–
2008 school year.
2. Waiver Applicant: Missouri
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: June 10, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
Missouri the flexibility to implement a
growth-based accountability model as
part of determining AYP beginning in
the 2007–2008 school year, conditioned
upon Missouri’s adopting a uniform
minimum group size for all subgroups,
including students with disabilities and
limited English proficient students.
Continuation Applicants:
1. Waiver Applicant: Alaska
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
Alaska the flexibility to continue to use
a growth-based accountability model as
part of determining AYP in 2008–2009
based on assessments administered in
the 2007–2008 school year.
2. Waiver Applicant: Arizona
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
Arizona the flexibility to continue to use
a growth-based accountability model as
part of determining AYP in 2008–2009
based on assessments administered in
the 2007–2008 school year.
3. Waiver Applicant: Arkansas
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
Arkansas the flexibility to continue to
use a growth-based accountability
model as part of determining AYP in
2008–2009 based on assessments
administered in the 2007–2008 school
year.
4. Waiver Applicant: Delaware
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
Delaware the flexibility to continue to
use a growth-based accountability
model as part of determining AYP in
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2008–2009 based on assessments
administered in the 2007–2008 school
year.
5. Waiver Applicant: Florida
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
Florida the flexibility to continue to use
a growth-based accountability model as
part of determining AYP in 2008–2009
based on assessments administered in
the 2007–2008 school year.
6. Waiver Applicant: Iowa Department
of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
Iowa the flexibility to continue to use a
growth-based accountability model as
part of determining AYP in 2008–2009
based on assessments administered in
the 2007–2008 school year.
7. Waiver Applicant: North Carolina
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
North Carolina the flexibility to
continue to use a growth-based
accountability model as part of
determining AYP in 2008–2009 based
on assessments administered in the
2007–2008 school year.
8. Waiver Applicant: Ohio
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
Ohio the flexibility to continue to use a
growth-based accountability model as
part of determining AYP in 2008–2009
based on assessments administered in
the 2007–2008 school year.
9. Waiver Applicant: Tennessee
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section
1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Extended
Tennessee the flexibility to continue to
use a growth-based accountability
model as part of determining AYP in
2008–2009 based on assessments
administered in the 2007–2008 school
year.
III. ‘‘Differentiated Accountability
Model Pilots’’
1. Waiver Applicant: Florida
Department of Education
• Provision waived: Section 1116 of
the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
Florida the flexibility to include its
E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM
15MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 93 / Friday, May 15, 2009 / Notices
differentiated accountability model as a
part of its system of school
improvement interventions based on
assessment results from the 2007–2008
school year.
2. Waiver Applicant: Georgia
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section 1116 of
the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
Georgia the flexibility to include its
differentiated accountability model as a
part of its system of school
improvement interventions based on
assessment results from the 2007–2008
school year.
3. Waiver Applicant: Illinois
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section 1116 of
the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
Illinois the flexibility to include its
differentiated accountability model as a
part of its system of school
improvement interventions based on
assessment results from the 2007–2008
school year.
4. Waiver Applicant: Indiana
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section 1116 of
the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
Indiana the flexibility to include its
differentiated accountability model as a
part of its system of school
improvement interventions based on
assessment results from the 2007–2008
school year.
5. Waiver Applicant: Maryland
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section 1116 of
the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
Maryland the flexibility to include its
differentiated accountability model as a
part of its system of school
improvement interventions based on
assessment results from the 2007–2008
school year.
6. Waiver Applicant: Ohio
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section 1116 of
the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
Ohio the flexibility to include its
differentiated accountability model as a
part of its system of school
improvement interventions based on
assessment results from the 2007–2008
school year.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:43 May 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
IV. Allowing LEAs in Need of
Improvement To Be Eligible To Apply
to Their SEA To Become Supplemental
Educational Services (SES) Providers
New Applicant:
1. Waiver Applicant: CharlotteMecklenburg Schools, NC.
• Provision waived: 34 CFR
200.47(b)(1)(iv)(B).
• Date waiver granted: August 4,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Permitted
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools to be
eligible to apply to its SEA to become
a provider of SES to eligible students
during the 2008–2009 school year even
though the LEA was identified for
improvement.
Continuation Applicants:
1. Waiver Applicant: Anchorage
School District, AK.
• Provision waived: 34 CFR
200.47(b)(1)(iv)(B).
• Date waiver granted: August 4,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Permitted the
Anchorage School District to continue
to be eligible to apply to its SEA to
become a provider of SES to eligible
students during the 2008–2009 school
year even though the LEA was
identified for improvement.
2. Waiver Applicant: Boston Public
Schools, MA.
• Provision waived: 34 CFR
200.47(b)(1)(iv)(B).
• Date waiver granted: August 4,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Permitted
Boston Public Schools to continue to be
eligible to apply to its SEA to become
a provider of SES to eligible students
during the 2008–2009 school year even
though the LEA was identified for
improvement.
3. Waiver Applicant: Chicago Public
Schools, IL.
• Provision waived: 34 CFR
200.47(b)(1)(iv)(B).
• Date waiver granted: August 4,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Permitted
Chicago Public Schools to continue to
be eligible to apply to its SEA to become
a provider of SES to eligible students
during the 2008–2009 school year even
though the LEA was identified for
improvement.
4. Waiver Applicant: Hillsborough
County Public Schools, FL.
• Provision waived: 34 CFR
200.47(b)(1)(iv)(B).
• Date waiver granted: August 4,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Permitted
Hillsborough County Public Schools to
continue to be eligible to apply to its
SEA to become a provider of SES to
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22911
eligible students during the 2008–2009
school year even though the LEA was
identified for improvement.
V. Allowing LEAs to Provide SES to
Eligible Students in Title I Schools in
the First Year of School Improvement
New Applicants:
1. Waiver Applicant: Alabama
Department of Education.
Provisions waived: Sections
1116(b)(1)(E) and 1116(b)(5)(B) of the
ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: August 1,
2008.
• Description of waiver: For the 2008–
2009 school year, permitted all LEAs in
Alabama to offer SES, rather than, or in
addition to, public school choice, to
eligible students in Title I schools in the
first year of school improvement.
2. Waiver Applicant: Arkansas
Department of Education.
• Provisions waived: Sections
1116(b)(1)(E) and 1116(b)(5)(B) of the
ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: August 1,
2008.
• Description of waiver: For the 2008–
2009 school year, permitted all LEAs in
Arkansas to offer SES, rather than
public school choice, to eligible
students in Title I schools in the first
year of school improvement.
3. Waiver Applicant: Tennessee
Department of Education.
• Provisions waived: Sections
1116(b)(1)(E) and 1116(b)(5)(B) of the
ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: August 1,
2008.
• Description of waiver: For the 2008–
2009 school year, permitted all LEAs in
Tennessee to offer SES, in addition to
public school choice, to eligible
students in Title I schools in the first
year of school improvement.
4. Waiver Applicant: Utah Department
of Public Instruction.
• Provisions waived: Sections
1116(b)(1)(E) and 1116(b)(5)(B) of the
ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: August 1,
2008.
• Description of waiver: For the 2008–
2009 school year, permitted all LEAs in
Utah to offer SES, rather than public
school choice, to eligible students in
Title I schools in the first year of school
improvement.
Continuation Applicants:
1. Waiver Applicant: Alaska
Department of Education and Early
Development.
• Provisions waived: Sections
1116(b)(1)(E) and 1116(b)(5)(B) of the
ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: August 1,
2008.
E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM
15MYN1
22912
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 93 / Friday, May 15, 2009 / Notices
• Description of waiver: For the 2008–
2009 school year, permitted five LEAs—
Anchorage School District, Fairbanks
North Star Borough, Juneau Borough,
Kenai Peninsula Borough, and
Matanuska-Susitna Borough—to offer
SES, rather than public school choice, to
eligible students in Title I schools in the
first year of school improvement.
2. Waiver Applicant: North Carolina
Department of Public Instruction.
• Provisions waived: Sections
1116(b)(1)(E) and 1116(b)(5)(B) of the
ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: August 1,
2008.
• Description of waiver: For the 2008–
2009 school year, continue to allow all
LEAs in North Carolina to offer SES,
rather than public school choice, to
eligible students in Title I schools in the
first year of school improvement.
3. Waiver Applicant: Virginia
Department of Education.
• Provisions waived: Sections
1116(b)(1)(E) and 1116(b)(5)(B) of the
ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: August 1,
2008.
• Description of waiver: For the 2008–
2009 school year, permitted 14 LEAs—
Albemarle County, Alexandria City,
Fairfax County, Fauquier County,
Fluvanna County, Hampton City,
Harrisonburg City, Henrico County,
Loudoun County, Manassas City,
Martinsville City, Richmond City,
Spotsylvania County, and WilliamsburgJames City County—to offer SES, rather
than public school choice, to eligible
students in Title I schools in the first
year of school improvement.
VI. Schoolwide Eligibility Waiver
1. Waiver Applicant: Berkeley County
Schools, WV.
• Provision waived: Section 1114(a)
of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: June 25, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Permits an
elementary school to implement a Title
I schoolwide program even though
fewer than 40 percent of its students are
from low-income families.
VII. Title I Within-District Allocation
Waiver
1. Waiver Applicant: Henry County
School District, GA.
• Provisions waived: Sections 1113(a)
and (b) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: April 10, 2008.
• Description of waiver: Allows the
LEA to skip a newly opening school in
order to serve an existing Title I school
with a slightly lower poverty rate for
one additional year.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:43 May 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
VIII. Transferability Waiver
1. Waiver Applicant: New York State
Department of Education.
• Provision waived: Section 6123(a)
of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: August 14,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Permits the
State to transfer certain Title II, Part A
funds for State-level activities to its
Title I, Part A administrative reserve.
IX. Local-Flexibility Demonstration
Program
1. Waiver Applicant: Seattle Public
Schools, WA.
• Provision waived: Section
6154(a)(1) of the ESEA.
• Date waiver granted: September 29,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Waives the
requirement that precludes the LEA
from continuing to implement its localflex agreement because it failed to make
AYP for two consecutive years.
X. Consolidated Grant Restrictions
1. Waiver Applicant: American Samoa
Department of Education, ASDE.
• Provision waived: 34 CFR 76.136
and 76.137.
• Date waiver granted: September 26,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
ASDE the flexibility to use funds under
its Fiscal Year 2008 consolidated grant
for programs under Title V, Part A of the
ESEA.
2. Waiver Applicant: Guam Public
School Systems, GPSS.
• Provision waived: 34 CFR 76.136
and 76.137.
• Date waiver granted: September 26,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
GPSS the flexibility to use funds under
its Fiscal Year 2008 consolidated grant
for programs under Title V, Part A of the
ESEA.
3. Waiver Applicant: Commonwealth
of the Northern Mariana Islands Public
School System, CNMI.
• Provision waived: 34 CFR 76.136
and 76.137.
• Date waiver granted: September 26,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
CNMI the flexibility to use funds under
its Fiscal Year 2008 consolidated grant
for programs under Title V, Part A of the
ESEA.
4. Waiver Applicant: Virgin Islands
Department of Education, VIDE.
• Provision waived: 34 CFR 76.136
and 76.137.
• Date waiver granted: November 13,
2008.
• Description of waiver: Provided
VIDE the flexibility to use funds under
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
its Fiscal Year 2008 consolidated grant
for programs under Title V, Part A of the
ESEA.
XI. Waivers of the Administrative Cost
Limitation That Applies to Indian
Education Funds
On May 29, 2008, the Department
granted the following LEAs waivers of
section 7115(d) of the ESEA, which
establishes a five percent administrative
cost limitation on funds awarded under
the Indian Education formula grant
program:
• Kenai Peninsula Borough Schools,
AK.
• San Carlos Unified School District,
AZ.
• Whiteriver Unified School District,
AZ.
• Ventura Unified School District,
CA.
• Little Axe Public Schools, OK.
• Muskogee Public Schools, OK.
• Oolagah-Talala Public Schools, OK.
• Sulphur Public Schools, OK.
• Tulsa Public Schools, OK.
• Spokane Public Schools (School
District 81), WA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luz
Curet, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Room
3W344, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 205–3728 or by e-mail:
luz.curet@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD), call the
Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at
1–800–877–8339. Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or computer diskette)
on request to the program contact
person listed in this section.
Electronic Access to This Document:
You may view this document, as well as
all other documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF) 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.
Delegation of Authority: The Secretary
of Education has delegated authority to
Joseph C. Conaty, Director, Academic
Improvement and Teacher Quality
Programs for the Office of Elementary
and Secondary Education, to perform
the functions of the Assistant Secretary
for Elementary and Secondary
Education.
E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM
15MYN1
22913
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 93 / Friday, May 15, 2009 / Notices
Dated: May 12, 2009.
Joseph C. Conaty,
Director, Academic Improvement and
Teacher Quality Programs.
[FR Doc. E9–11413 Filed 5–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. IC09–714–000]
Commission Information Collection
Activities (FERC–714); Comment
Request; Extension
May 7, 2009.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, DOE.
ACTION: Notice of proposed information
collection and request for comments.
SUMMARY: In compliance with the
requirements of section 3506(c)(2)(a) of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(Pub. L. No. 104–13), the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) is soliciting public comment on
the specific aspects of the information
collection described below.
DATES: Comments in consideration of
the collection of information are due
July 13, 2009.
ADDRESSES: An example of this
collection of information may be
obtained from the Commission’s Web
site (at https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
elibrary.asp). Comments may be filed
either electronically or in paper format,
and should refer to Docket No. IC09–
714–000. Documents must be prepared
in an acceptable filing format and in
compliance with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission submission
guidelines at https://www.ferc.gov/help/
submission-guide.asp.
Comments may be filed electronically
via the eFiling link on the Commission’s
Web site at www.ferc.gov. First time
users will have to establish a user name
and password (https://www.ferc.gov/
docs-filing/eregistration.asp) before
eFiling. The Commission will send an
automatic acknowledgement to the
sender’s e-mail address upon receipt of
comments through eFiling.
Commenters filing electronically
should not make a paper filing.
Commenters that are not able to file
electronically must send an original and
14 copies of their comments to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission,
Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
Users interested in receiving
automatic notification of activity in this
docket may do so through eSubscription
(at https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp). In addition, all
comments and FERC issuances may be
viewed, printed or downloaded
remotely through FERC’s Web site using
the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and searching on
Docket Number IC09–714. For user
assistance, contact FERC Online
Support (e-mail at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or call tollfree at (866) 208–3676, or for TTY,
contact (202) 502–8659).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ellen Brown may be reached by
telephone at (202) 502–8663, by fax at
(202) 273–0873, and by e-mail at
ellen.brown@ferc.gov.
FERC–714
(Annual Electric Balancing Authority
Area and Planning Area Report
(formerly called ‘‘Annual Electric
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Control and Planning Area Report’’),
OMB No. 1902–0140) is used by the
Commission to implement Sections 4,
202, 207, 210, 211–213, 304, 309 and
311 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) as
amended (49 Stat. 838: 16 U.S.C. 791 a–
825r), Section 3(4) of Public Utility
Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, 26
U.S.C. 2602 and sections 1211, 1221,
1231, 1241 and 1242 of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109–58) (119
Stat. 594). The filing requirements are
found at 18 CFR 141.51. The
information allows the Commission to
analyze power system operations, to
estimate the effect of changes in power
system operations that result from the
installation of a new generating unit or
plant, transmission facilities, energy
transfers between systems and/or new
points of interconnections. The analyses
also serve to correlate rates and charges,
assess reliability and other operating
attributes in regulatory proceedings,
monitor market trends and behaviors,
and determine the competitive impacts
of proposed mergers, acquisitions and
dispositions.
ACTION: The Commission is requesting a
three-year extension of the current
reporting requirements.
Burden Statement: There has been a
change in burden due to: (1) An
informal, limited survey of respondents
in order to obtain improved estimates of
both the burden and cost, (2) a change
in the number of filers resulting from
the formation of regional transmission
organizations (and other similar entities)
encompassing numerous former Control
Areas (Balancing Authority Areas), and
(3) the switch to an all-electronic filing
in 2007 (from a paper and diskette
filing). Public reporting burden for this
collection is estimated as follows.
Number of
respondents
annually
Number of
responses per
respondent
Average
burden hours
per response
Total annual
burden hours
(1)
FERC data collection
(2)
(3)
(1)x(2)x(3)
215
1
1 87
1 18,705
FERC–714 .......................................................................................................
Note: These figures may not be exact, due to rounding.
The total estimated annual cost
burden1 to respondents is $885,155 (215
respondents × $4,117 per respondent).
1 These figures are based on a limited survey of
8 respondents. The average estimated annual
burden per respondent (and filing) is 87 hours.
Using the number of hours spent by each specific
job title or level, the estimated annual staff cost was
calculated based on the nationwide average annual
salary for various levels of engineers, found in the
Occupational Outlook Handbook (2008–09 Edition)
[posted on the Bureau of Labor Statistics Web site
at https://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos027.htm]. The
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:43 May 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
The reporting burden includes the
total time, effort, or financial resources
expended to generate, maintain, retain,
disclose, or provide the information
including: (1) Reviewing instructions;
(2) developing, acquiring, installing, and
estimated average annual staff cost for preparing the
FERC–714 was $3,603.
The respondents surveyed had additional costs of
$514, on average per year. Therefore the total
estimated average annual cost per respondent is
$4,117.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
utilizing technology and systems for the
purposes of collecting, validating,
verifying, processing, maintaining,
disclosing and providing information;
(3) adjusting the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; (4)
training personnel to respond to a
collection of information; (5) searching
data sources; (6) completing and
reviewing the collection of information;
E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM
15MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 93 (Friday, May 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22909-22913]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11413]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Notice of Waivers Granted Under Section 9401 of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as Amended
SUMMARY: In this notice, we announce the waivers that the U.S.
Department of Education (Department) granted during calendar year 2008
under the waiver authority in section 9401 of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended.
In 2008, the Department granted a total of 51 waivers under the
ESEA section 9401 waiver authority. The waivers granted were as
follows: (1) Four waivers related to Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Ike;
(2) two new waivers allowing implementation of the ``growth model
pilot,'' and nine extensions of existing waivers to continue
implementation of a ``growth model pilot''; (3) six new waivers
allowing implementation of the ``differentiated accountability model
pilot''; (4) one new waiver and four continuations of existing waivers
allowing local educational agencies (LEAs) in need of improvement to be
[[Page 22910]]
eligible to apply to their State educational agency (SEA) to become
supplemental educational services (SES) providers; (5) four new waivers
and three continuations of existing waivers allowing LEAs to provide
SES to eligible students attending schools that receive funding under
Title I, Part A of the ESEA (Title I schools) and are in the first year
of school improvement; (6) one Title I schoolwide eligibility waiver;
(7) one Title I, Part A within-district allocation waiver; (8) one
waiver of the ESEA transferability rules; (9) one ``local-flex''
waiver; (10) four waivers to the Consolidated Grants restrictions; and
(11) ten waivers allowing recipients of funds under the Indian
Education program to charge additional administrative costs to the
program.
Waiver Data:
Waivers Related to Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Ike
1. Waiver Applicant: Louisiana Department of Education.
Provision waived: Tydings Amendment, section 421(b) of the
General Education Provisions Act (GEPA).
Date waiver granted: May 6, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended until September 30, 2009
the period of availability for fiscal year 2006 funds for all programs
authorized under the ESEA.
2. Waiver Applicant: Mississippi Department of Education.
Provision waived: Tydings Amendment, section 421(b) of
GEPA.
Date waiver granted: October 7, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended until September 30, 2009
the period of availability for fiscal year 2006 Title II, Part A funds.
3. Waiver Applicant: Mississippi Department of Education.
Provision waived: Tydings Amendment, section 421(b) of
GEPA.
Date waiver granted: October 7, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended until September 30, 2009
the period of availability for fiscal year 2006 Title I, Part B,
Subpart 1 funds.
4. Waiver Applicant: Texas Education Agency.
Provision waived: Tydings Amendment, section 421(b) of
GEPA.
Date waiver granted: October 9, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended until September 30, 2009
the period of availability for fiscal year 2006 Title I, Part B,
Subpart 1 funds.
II. ``Growth Model Pilots''
New Applicants:
1. Waiver Applicant: Michigan Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: June 10, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided Michigan the flexibility
to implement a growth-based accountability model as part of determining
adequate yearly progress (AYP) beginning in the 2007-2008 school year.
2. Waiver Applicant: Missouri Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: June 10, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided Missouri the flexibility
to implement a growth-based accountability model as part of determining
AYP beginning in the 2007-2008 school year, conditioned upon Missouri's
adopting a uniform minimum group size for all subgroups, including
students with disabilities and limited English proficient students.
Continuation Applicants:
1. Waiver Applicant: Alaska Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended Alaska the flexibility to
continue to use a growth-based accountability model as part of
determining AYP in 2008-2009 based on assessments administered in the
2007-2008 school year.
2. Waiver Applicant: Arizona Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended Arizona the flexibility to
continue to use a growth-based accountability model as part of
determining AYP in 2008-2009 based on assessments administered in the
2007-2008 school year.
3. Waiver Applicant: Arkansas Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended Arkansas the flexibility
to continue to use a growth-based accountability model as part of
determining AYP in 2008-2009 based on assessments administered in the
2007-2008 school year.
4. Waiver Applicant: Delaware Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended Delaware the flexibility
to continue to use a growth-based accountability model as part of
determining AYP in 2008-2009 based on assessments administered in the
2007-2008 school year.
5. Waiver Applicant: Florida Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended Florida the flexibility to
continue to use a growth-based accountability model as part of
determining AYP in 2008-2009 based on assessments administered in the
2007-2008 school year.
6. Waiver Applicant: Iowa Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended Iowa the flexibility to
continue to use a growth-based accountability model as part of
determining AYP in 2008-2009 based on assessments administered in the
2007-2008 school year.
7. Waiver Applicant: North Carolina Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended North Carolina the
flexibility to continue to use a growth-based accountability model as
part of determining AYP in 2008-2009 based on assessments administered
in the 2007-2008 school year.
8. Waiver Applicant: Ohio Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended Ohio the flexibility to
continue to use a growth-based accountability model as part of
determining AYP in 2008-2009 based on assessments administered in the
2007-2008 school year.
9. Waiver Applicant: Tennessee Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 25, 2008.
Description of waiver: Extended Tennessee the flexibility
to continue to use a growth-based accountability model as part of
determining AYP in 2008-2009 based on assessments administered in the
2007-2008 school year.
III. ``Differentiated Accountability Model Pilots''
1. Waiver Applicant: Florida Department of Education
Provision waived: Section 1116 of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided Florida the flexibility to
include its
[[Page 22911]]
differentiated accountability model as a part of its system of school
improvement interventions based on assessment results from the 2007-
2008 school year.
2. Waiver Applicant: Georgia Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1116 of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided Georgia the flexibility to
include its differentiated accountability model as a part of its system
of school improvement interventions based on assessment results from
the 2007-2008 school year.
3. Waiver Applicant: Illinois Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1116 of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided Illinois the flexibility
to include its differentiated accountability model as a part of its
system of school improvement interventions based on assessment results
from the 2007-2008 school year.
4. Waiver Applicant: Indiana Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1116 of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided Indiana the flexibility to
include its differentiated accountability model as a part of its system
of school improvement interventions based on assessment results from
the 2007-2008 school year.
5. Waiver Applicant: Maryland Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1116 of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided Maryland the flexibility
to include its differentiated accountability model as a part of its
system of school improvement interventions based on assessment results
from the 2007-2008 school year.
6. Waiver Applicant: Ohio Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 1116 of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: July 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided Ohio the flexibility to
include its differentiated accountability model as a part of its system
of school improvement interventions based on assessment results from
the 2007-2008 school year.
IV. Allowing LEAs in Need of Improvement To Be Eligible To Apply to
Their SEA To Become Supplemental Educational Services (SES) Providers
New Applicant:
1. Waiver Applicant: Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, NC.
Provision waived: 34 CFR 200.47(b)(1)(iv)(B).
Date waiver granted: August 4, 2008.
Description of waiver: Permitted Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Schools to be eligible to apply to its SEA to become a provider of SES
to eligible students during the 2008-2009 school year even though the
LEA was identified for improvement.
Continuation Applicants:
1. Waiver Applicant: Anchorage School District, AK.
Provision waived: 34 CFR 200.47(b)(1)(iv)(B).
Date waiver granted: August 4, 2008.
Description of waiver: Permitted the Anchorage School
District to continue to be eligible to apply to its SEA to become a
provider of SES to eligible students during the 2008-2009 school year
even though the LEA was identified for improvement.
2. Waiver Applicant: Boston Public Schools, MA.
Provision waived: 34 CFR 200.47(b)(1)(iv)(B).
Date waiver granted: August 4, 2008.
Description of waiver: Permitted Boston Public Schools to
continue to be eligible to apply to its SEA to become a provider of SES
to eligible students during the 2008-2009 school year even though the
LEA was identified for improvement.
3. Waiver Applicant: Chicago Public Schools, IL.
Provision waived: 34 CFR 200.47(b)(1)(iv)(B).
Date waiver granted: August 4, 2008.
Description of waiver: Permitted Chicago Public Schools to
continue to be eligible to apply to its SEA to become a provider of SES
to eligible students during the 2008-2009 school year even though the
LEA was identified for improvement.
4. Waiver Applicant: Hillsborough County Public Schools, FL.
Provision waived: 34 CFR 200.47(b)(1)(iv)(B).
Date waiver granted: August 4, 2008.
Description of waiver: Permitted Hillsborough County
Public Schools to continue to be eligible to apply to its SEA to become
a provider of SES to eligible students during the 2008-2009 school year
even though the LEA was identified for improvement.
V. Allowing LEAs to Provide SES to Eligible Students in Title I Schools
in the First Year of School Improvement
New Applicants:
1. Waiver Applicant: Alabama Department of Education.
Provisions waived: Sections 1116(b)(1)(E) and 1116(b)(5)(B) of the
ESEA.
Date waiver granted: August 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: For the 2008-2009 school year,
permitted all LEAs in Alabama to offer SES, rather than, or in addition
to, public school choice, to eligible students in Title I schools in
the first year of school improvement.
2. Waiver Applicant: Arkansas Department of Education.
Provisions waived: Sections 1116(b)(1)(E) and
1116(b)(5)(B) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: August 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: For the 2008-2009 school year,
permitted all LEAs in Arkansas to offer SES, rather than public school
choice, to eligible students in Title I schools in the first year of
school improvement.
3. Waiver Applicant: Tennessee Department of Education.
Provisions waived: Sections 1116(b)(1)(E) and
1116(b)(5)(B) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: August 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: For the 2008-2009 school year,
permitted all LEAs in Tennessee to offer SES, in addition to public
school choice, to eligible students in Title I schools in the first
year of school improvement.
4. Waiver Applicant: Utah Department of Public Instruction.
Provisions waived: Sections 1116(b)(1)(E) and
1116(b)(5)(B) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: August 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: For the 2008-2009 school year,
permitted all LEAs in Utah to offer SES, rather than public school
choice, to eligible students in Title I schools in the first year of
school improvement.
Continuation Applicants:
1. Waiver Applicant: Alaska Department of Education and Early
Development.
Provisions waived: Sections 1116(b)(1)(E) and
1116(b)(5)(B) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: August 1, 2008.
[[Page 22912]]
Description of waiver: For the 2008-2009 school year,
permitted five LEAs--Anchorage School District, Fairbanks North Star
Borough, Juneau Borough, Kenai Peninsula Borough, and Matanuska-Susitna
Borough--to offer SES, rather than public school choice, to eligible
students in Title I schools in the first year of school improvement.
2. Waiver Applicant: North Carolina Department of Public
Instruction.
Provisions waived: Sections 1116(b)(1)(E) and
1116(b)(5)(B) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: August 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: For the 2008-2009 school year,
continue to allow all LEAs in North Carolina to offer SES, rather than
public school choice, to eligible students in Title I schools in the
first year of school improvement.
3. Waiver Applicant: Virginia Department of Education.
Provisions waived: Sections 1116(b)(1)(E) and
1116(b)(5)(B) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: August 1, 2008.
Description of waiver: For the 2008-2009 school year,
permitted 14 LEAs--Albemarle County, Alexandria City, Fairfax County,
Fauquier County, Fluvanna County, Hampton City, Harrisonburg City,
Henrico County, Loudoun County, Manassas City, Martinsville City,
Richmond City, Spotsylvania County, and Williamsburg-James City
County--to offer SES, rather than public school choice, to eligible
students in Title I schools in the first year of school improvement.
VI. Schoolwide Eligibility Waiver
1. Waiver Applicant: Berkeley County Schools, WV.
Provision waived: Section 1114(a) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: June 25, 2008.
Description of waiver: Permits an elementary school to
implement a Title I schoolwide program even though fewer than 40
percent of its students are from low-income families.
VII. Title I Within-District Allocation Waiver
1. Waiver Applicant: Henry County School District, GA.
Provisions waived: Sections 1113(a) and (b) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: April 10, 2008.
Description of waiver: Allows the LEA to skip a newly
opening school in order to serve an existing Title I school with a
slightly lower poverty rate for one additional year.
VIII. Transferability Waiver
1. Waiver Applicant: New York State Department of Education.
Provision waived: Section 6123(a) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: August 14, 2008.
Description of waiver: Permits the State to transfer
certain Title II, Part A funds for State-level activities to its Title
I, Part A administrative reserve.
IX. Local-Flexibility Demonstration Program
1. Waiver Applicant: Seattle Public Schools, WA.
Provision waived: Section 6154(a)(1) of the ESEA.
Date waiver granted: September 29, 2008.
Description of waiver: Waives the requirement that
precludes the LEA from continuing to implement its local-flex agreement
because it failed to make AYP for two consecutive years.
X. Consolidated Grant Restrictions
1. Waiver Applicant: American Samoa Department of Education, ASDE.
Provision waived: 34 CFR 76.136 and 76.137.
Date waiver granted: September 26, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided ASDE the flexibility to
use funds under its Fiscal Year 2008 consolidated grant for programs
under Title V, Part A of the ESEA.
2. Waiver Applicant: Guam Public School Systems, GPSS.
Provision waived: 34 CFR 76.136 and 76.137.
Date waiver granted: September 26, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided GPSS the flexibility to
use funds under its Fiscal Year 2008 consolidated grant for programs
under Title V, Part A of the ESEA.
3. Waiver Applicant: Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
Public School System, CNMI.
Provision waived: 34 CFR 76.136 and 76.137.
Date waiver granted: September 26, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided CNMI the flexibility to
use funds under its Fiscal Year 2008 consolidated grant for programs
under Title V, Part A of the ESEA.
4. Waiver Applicant: Virgin Islands Department of Education, VIDE.
Provision waived: 34 CFR 76.136 and 76.137.
Date waiver granted: November 13, 2008.
Description of waiver: Provided VIDE the flexibility to
use funds under its Fiscal Year 2008 consolidated grant for programs
under Title V, Part A of the ESEA.
XI. Waivers of the Administrative Cost Limitation That Applies to
Indian Education Funds
On May 29, 2008, the Department granted the following LEAs waivers
of section 7115(d) of the ESEA, which establishes a five percent
administrative cost limitation on funds awarded under the Indian
Education formula grant program:
Kenai Peninsula Borough Schools, AK.
San Carlos Unified School District, AZ.
Whiteriver Unified School District, AZ.
Ventura Unified School District, CA.
Little Axe Public Schools, OK.
Muskogee Public Schools, OK.
Oolagah-Talala Public Schools, OK.
Sulphur Public Schools, OK.
Tulsa Public Schools, OK.
Spokane Public Schools (School District 81), WA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luz Curet, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Room 3W344, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 205-3728 or by e-mail: luz.curet@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the
Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339. Individuals
with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on
request to the program contact person listed in this section.
Electronic Access to This Document: You may view this document, as
well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal
Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) 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.
Delegation of Authority: The Secretary of Education has delegated
authority to Joseph C. Conaty, Director, Academic Improvement and
Teacher Quality Programs for the Office of Elementary and Secondary
Education, to perform the functions of the Assistant Secretary for
Elementary and Secondary Education.
[[Page 22913]]
Dated: May 12, 2009.
Joseph C. Conaty,
Director, Academic Improvement and Teacher Quality Programs.
[FR Doc. E9-11413 Filed 5-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
