Notice of Intent To Establish a Negotiated Rulemaking Committee, 69161-69166 [2015-28379]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 216 / Monday, November 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Nov 06, 2015
Jkt 238001
Note: For optional additional guidance on
the design of warnings for instructional
literature, see the most-recent addition of
ANSI Z535.6, Product Safety Information in
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Product Manuals, Instructions, and Other
Collateral Materials, American National
Standards Institute, Inc., available at https://
www.ansi.org/.
Dated: November 2, 2015.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015–28300 Filed 11–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
25 CFR Part 30
[167 A2100DD/AAKC001030/
A0A501010.999900]
Notice of Intent To Establish a
Negotiated Rulemaking Committee
Bureau of Indian Education,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent; request for
nominations for tribal representatives;
and comments.
AGENCY:
The Bureau of Indian
Education (BIE) is announcing its intent
to establish an Accountability
Negotiated Rulemaking Committee
(Committee). The Committee will
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09NOP1.SGM
09NOP1
EP09NO15.321</GPH>
(vi) 8.4.6 The warning statements
shall be in a location that is visible by
the caregiver while placing the occupant
into the high chair in each of the
manufacturer’s recommended use
positions.
(vii) 8.4.7 High chairs that do not
have a seating component that is also
used as a seating component of a
stroller, shall, in the same label, address
the following warning statements:
Children have suffered skull fractures
after falling from high chairs. Falls can
happen quickly if child is not restrained
properly.
• Always use restraints, and adjust to
fit snugly. Tray is not designed to hold
child in chair.
• Stay near and watch your child
during use.
(viii) 8.4.8 High chairs that have a
seating component that is also used as
a seating component of a stroller shall
use the warning statements as specified
in subsections 8.2.2.1 and 8.2.2.2 of the
version of the standard that is
incorporated by reference in part 1227
of this subchapter, in place of the
warning statements in 8.4.7 (paragraph
(d)(vii) of this section).
(e) Instead of complying with section
9.2 of ASTM F404–15, comply with the
following:
(1) 9.2 The instructions shall contain
the warnings as specified in section 8.4
(paragraph (d)(1) of this section).
Additional warnings similar to the
statements included in this section shall
also be included. These required
warning statements shall meet the
requirements described in section 8.4
(paragraph (d)(1) of this section), except
for the color requirements (i.e., the
background of the signal word panel
need not be orange, red, or yellow).
However, the warning statements still
must be in highly contrasting color(s)
(e.g., black text on a white background),
and if color is used, those colors must
meet the color requirements specified in
section 8.4 (paragraph (d)(1) of this
section).
(2) Reference to section 9.2 of ASTM
F404–15 in paragraph (e) of this section
includes only the introductory
paragraph of section 9.2 and does not
include subsections 9.2.1 or 9.2.2 of
ASTM F404–15.
EP09NO15.320</GPH>
Note: For optional additional guidance on
the design of warnings, see the most-recent
edition of ANSI Z535.4, Product Safety Signs
and Labels, American National Standards
Institute, Inc., available at https://
www.ansi.org/.
shall be the same color as the
background. The remainder of the text
EP09NO15.320</GPH>
and the signal word ‘‘WARNING’’ shall
be orange, red, or yellow, whichever
provides the best contrast against the
shall be black. The exclamation mark of
the safety alert symbol
shall be black, with key words
highlighted using boldface, on a white
background surrounded by a solid black
line border. This text also shall be leftjustified, in upper and lowercase letters
(i.e., sentence capitalization), and in list
or outline format, with precautionary
statements indented from hazard
statements and preceded with bullet
points. An example label in the format
described in this section is shown in
Figure 2.
EP09NO15.320</GPH> EP09NO15.320</GPH>
and the signal word ‘‘WARNING’’ shall
be in contrasting color to the
background and delineated with solid
black line borders. The background
color behind the safety alert symbol
product background. The signal word
‘‘WARNING’’ and the solid triangle
portion of the safety alert symbol
69161
69162
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 216 / Monday, November 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
recommend revisions to the existing
regulations for BIE’s accountability
system. As required by applicable
statutes, the Secretary will select
representatives of Indian tribes for the
Committee from among individuals
nominated by tribes whose students
attend BIE-funded schools operated by
either the BIE or by the tribe through a
contract or grant and who would be
affected by a final rule. The BIE also
solicits comments on the proposal to
establish the Committee, including
comments on additional interests not
identified in this notice of intent, and
invites tribes to nominate
representatives for membership on the
Committee.
DATES: Submit nominations for
Committee members or written
comments on this notice of intent on or
before December 24, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit
nominations for Committee members or
written comments on this notice of
intent by any of the following methods:
• Send comments or nominations to
Ms. Sue Bement, Designated Federal
Officer, Bureau of Indian Education,
1011 Indian School Road NW., Suite
332, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87104;
email: AYPcomments@bia.gov;
Telephone: (505) 563–5274; Fax: (505)
563–5281; or
• Hand-carry comments or use an
overnight courier service to Manuel
Lujan Jr. Building, Building II, Suite
332, 1011 Indian School Road NW.,
Suite 332, Albuquerque, New Mexico
87104.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Sue Bement, Designated Federal Officer;
Telephone: (505) 563–5274; Fax (505)
563–5281.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Under the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), student
achievement data is used to determine
whether schools are successfully
educating their students. Under current
law, this accountability measure is
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). The
law requires States to use a single
accountability system for schools to
determine whether all students, as well
as individual subgroups of students, are
making progress toward meeting State
academic content standards. The goal,
as stated in the ESEA, was to have all
students reaching proficient levels in
reading and math by 2014 as measured
by performance on State tests. The
ESEA requires the Bureau of Indian
Affairs to promulgate regulations
through negotiated rulemaking for the
accountability system to be used in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Nov 06, 2015
Jkt 238001
Bureau-funded schools. See 20 U.S.C.
6316(g)(1)(A)(i); 25 U.S.C. 2017–2018.
In 2005, BIA promulgated such
regulations. See 70 FR 22178 (April 28,
2005). These regulations, codified at 25
CFR 30.104, require BIE to use the
accountability system of the State in
which a BIE-funded school is located.
The BIE-funded schools are located in
23 different States; and each State has
its own accountability system. As a
result, each State system produces
student achievement data that cannot be
directly compared with data from other
States. For BIE, comparison is necessary
to identify under-performing schools
and direct resources effectively.
Regardless of whether AYP continues to
be the accountability measure required
under law, BIE must address this deeply
fragmented accountability system
through negotiated rulemaking to create
a more cohesive accountability system.
The BIE had previously developed a
method for comparing academic
achievement across States despite the
variances in academic standards.
Beginning in 2011, the U.S. Department
of Education began to grant flexibility
waivers to States for certain provisions
of ESEA, which has complicated the
method BIE uses to effectively compare
achievement. It is necessary, therefore,
to revise 25 CFR Part 30, and to receive
recommendations from a negotiated
rulemaking committee on how BIE can
compare academic achievement across
the 23 States.
This rulemaking would not change
the existing authority for tribes to adopt
their own tribal definition of AYP. The
BIE encourages tribal self-determination
in Native education, encouraging tribes
to develop alternative accountability
systems (and definitions of AYP) and
providing technical assistance. For
example, on June 1, 2015, U.S.
Education Secretary Arne Duncan and
Interior Secretary Sally Jewell
announced that the Miccosukee Indian
School received flexibility from the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act (ESEA) to use a definition of AYP
that meets their students’ unique
academic and cultural needs. Local
tribal communities know best what their
children need, and BIE prioritizes tribal
self-determination in Indian education.
This rulemaking aims only to make the
existing system more effective and
efficient. It would impact only those
BIE-funded schools that do not wish to
develop alternative definitions of AYP,
though the option will remain open to
them regardless.
In 2012, BIE conducted four regional
meetings on the topic of accountability
in BIE-funded schools. Meetings were
held in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, on
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
July 17, 2012; Flagstaff, Arizona, on July
20, 2012; Seattle, Washington, on July
24, 2012; and Bismarck, North Dakota,
on July 27, 2012. Transcripts of those
meetings can be referenced at https://
www.bie.edu/consultation/index.htm.
During the four meetings, BIE
received feedback from the tribes on the
ESEA Flexibility Request and the BIE’s
proposed flexibility waiver. At the
consultation sessions, BIE and the tribes
discussed adopting Common Core
standards—initially in reading, language
arts, and mathematics—to reflect tribal
values and employ a single assessment
system for all BIE-funded schools.
II. Statutory Provisions
The Negotiated Rulemaking Act of
1996 (NRA) (5 U.S.C. 561 et seq.); the
Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA) (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2); and the
NCLB (20 U.S.C. 2000 et seq.)
III. The Committee and Its Process
In a negotiated rulemaking,
recommended provisions of a proposed
rule are developed by a committee
composed of at least one representative
of the Federal Government and
representatives of the interests that will
be significantly affected by the rule.
Decisions are made by consensus,
which means unanimous concurrence
among the interests represented on the
Committee, unless the Committee agrees
to define ‘‘consensus’’ to mean a general
but not unanimous concurrence, or
agrees upon another specified
definition. 5 U.S.C. 562(2)(A) and (B).
As part of the negotiated rulemaking
process, BIE has identified interests
potentially affected by the rulemaking
under consideration, including students
enrolled at 174 BIE-funded schools,
parents of such students, school
administrators, Tribes, and the Indian
communities served by these schools.
By this notice of intent, BIE is soliciting:
(1) comments on its proposal to form a
negotiated rulemaking committee; and
(2) nominations for Committee members
who will adequately represent the
interests that are likely to be
significantly affected by the proposed
rule.
Following the receipt of nominations
and comments, BIE will publish a
second notice in the Federal Register
with a list of persons to represent the
interests that are likely to be
significantly affected by the rule, and
the person or persons proposed to
represent BIE. Persons who will be
significantly affected by the proposed
rule and who believe that their interests
will not be adequately represented by
E:\FR\FM\09NOP1.SGM
09NOP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 216 / Monday, November 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
any person specified in that second
Federal Register notice will be given an
opportunity to apply or nominate
another person for membership on the
negotiated rulemaking committee to
represent such interests with respect to
the proposed rule.
Following the second Federal
Register notice and responses to it, BIE
expects to establish the Committee.
After the Committee reaches consensus
on the recommended provisions of the
proposed rule, as discussed in more
detail below, BIE will publish a
proposed rule in the Federal Register.
Under 5 U.S.C. 563, the head of the
agency is required to determine that the
use of the negotiated rulemaking
procedure is in the public interest.
In making such a determination, the
agency head must consider certain
factors. Taking these factors into
account, the Secretary, through the
authority delegated to the Assistant
Secretary—Indian Affairs, has
determined that a negotiated rulemaking
is in the public interest because:
1. A rule is needed. The ESEA directs
the Secretary to conduct a negotiated
rulemaking pursuant to the NRA. The
current definition of AYP creates a
fragmented accountability system that
prevents the BIE from developing and
implementing comprehensive school
reform initiatives in the 174 BIE-funded
schools with academic programs in 23
States.
2. A limited number of identifiable
interests will be significantly affected by
the rule. The 174 BIE-funded schools,
students enrolled at these schools,
school teachers and administrators,
tribes, and Indian communities served
by these schools will be significantly
affected by this review and the
recommendations made by this
Committee.
3. There is a reasonable likelihood
that the Committee can be convened
with a balanced representation of
persons who can adequately represent
the interests discussed in item 2, above,
and who are willing to negotiate in good
faith to attempt to reach a consensus on
provisions of a proposed rule.
4. There is a reasonable likelihood
that the Committee will reach consensus
on a proposed rule within a fixed period
of time.
5. The use of negotiated rulemaking
will not unreasonably delay the
development of a proposed rule because
time limits will be placed on the
negotiation. We anticipate that these
negotiations will expedite a proposed
rule and ultimately the acceptance of a
final rule.
6. The BIE is making a commitment
to ensure that the Committee has
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Nov 06, 2015
Jkt 238001
sufficient resources to complete its work
in a timely fashion.
7. The BIE, to the maximum extent
possible and consistent with the legal
obligations of the Agency, will use the
consensus report of the Committee as
the basis for a proposed rule for public
notice and comment.
IV. Negotiated Rulemaking Procedures
In compliance with FACA and NRA,
BIE will use the following procedures
and guidelines for this negotiated
rulemaking. The BIE may modify them
in response to comments received on
this notice of intent or during the
negotiation process.
A. Committee Formation
The Committee will be formed and
operated in full compliance with the
requirements of FACA and NRA, and
specifically under the guidelines of its
charter.
B. Membership Responsibility
The Committee is expected to meet
approximately 3–5 times. The meetings
will be held at various locations across
Indian Country, and will last 2–3 days
each. The initial meeting will be in
person; some later meetings may be held
by teleconference and/or webconference. The Committee’s work is
expected to occur over the course of 6–
12 months. However, the Committee
may continue its work for a duration of
two years.
Because of the scope and complexity
of the tasks at hand, committee
members must be able to invest
considerable time and effort in the
negotiated rulemaking process.
Committee members must be able to
attend all committee meetings, work on
committee work groups, consult with
their constituencies between committee
meetings, and negotiate in good faith
toward a consensus on issues before the
Committee. Because of the complexity
of the issues under consideration, as
well as the need for continuity, the
Secretary reserves the right to replace
any member who is unable to
participate in the Committee’s meetings.
Responsibility for expenses is stated
under 5 U.S.C. 568(c) as follows:
Members of a negotiated rulemaking
committee shall be responsible for their
own expenses of participation in such
committee, except that an Agency may,
in accordance with section 7(d) of the
FACA, pay for a member’s reasonable
travel and per diem expenses, expenses
to obtain technical assistance, and a
reasonable rate of compensation, if—
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69163
1. Such member certifies a lack of
adequate financial resources to
participate in the Committee; and
2. The agency determines that such
members participation in the Committee
is necessary to assure an adequate
representation of the members interest.
The BIE commits to pay the
reasonable travel and per diem expenses
of Committee members, if appropriate
under the NRA and Federal travel
regulations.
C. Composition of Committee
The Secretary is seeking nominations
submitted by Tribes for tribal
representatives, consistent with the
provisions of 25 U.S.C. 2018, to serve on
the Committee, who have a
demonstrated ability to communicate
well with groups about the interests
they will represent. The Committee
cannot exceed 25 members, and BIE
prefers 15.
Tribal Committee membership must:
• Include only representatives of
Tribes served by BIE-funded schools;
• Be selected from among individuals
nominated by the Tribes that have
students attending BIE-funded schools;
• Reflect the proportionate share of
students from Tribes served by the BIEfunded school system; and
• Comply with the FACA
Section 2018 of Title 25 also requires
the Secretary to ensure that the various
interests affected by the proposed
report(s) or rules be represented on the
Committee. In making membership
decisions, the Secretary shall consider
whether the interest represented by a
nominee will be affected significantly
by the final products of the Committee,
which may include report(s) and/or
proposed regulations; whether that
interest is already adequately
represented by tribal nominees; and
whether the potential addition would
adequately represent that interest.
Federally registered lobbyists are
ineligible to serve on all FACA and nonFACA boards, committees, or councils
in an individual capacity. The term
‘‘individual capacity’’ refers to
individuals who are appointed to
exercise their own individual best
judgment on behalf of the government,
such as when they are designated
Special Government Employees, rather
than being appointed to represent a
particular interest.
D. Administrative and Technical
Support
The BIE will provide sufficient
administrative and technical resources
for the Committee to complete its work
in a timely fashion. The BIE, with the
help of the facilitator, will prepare all
E:\FR\FM\09NOP1.SGM
09NOP1
69164
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 216 / Monday, November 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
agendas, provide meeting notes, and
provide a final report of any issues on
which the Committee reaches
consensus.
E. Training and Organization
At the first meeting of the Committee,
a neutral facilitator will provide training
on negotiated rulemaking, interestsbased negotiations, consensus-building,
and team-building. In addition, at the
first meeting, Committee members will
make organizational decisions
concerning protocols, scheduling, and
facilitation of the Committee.
F. Interests Identified Through
Consultation
Under Section 562 of the NRA,
‘‘ ‘interest’ means, with respect to an
issue or matter, multiple parties which
have a similar point of view or which
are likely to be affected in a similar
manner.’’ The BIE has consulted with
BIE personnel and educators at BIEfunded schools. Through these and
previous consultations, such as those
conducted in 2012 for an Elementary
and Secondary Education Act
Flexibility Waiver Request, BIE has
identified interests to be significantly
affected by this new rule that include
students enrolled at 174 BIE-funded
schools, parents of such students,
school administrators, tribes, and the
Indian communities served by these
schools. The BIE is accepting comments
identifying other interests that may be
significantly affected by the final
products of the Committee, which may
include report(s) and/or proposed
regulations, until the date listed in the
DATES section of this notice of intent.
V. Request for Nominations and
Comments
The BIE solicits nominations from
tribes whose students attend BIE-funded
Student count
school year
2013–2014
Tribes
Tuba City Agency Western (AZ) ..............................................
Crown Point Agency Eastern (NM) .........................................
Chinle Agency (AZ) ..................................................................
Fort Defiance Agency (AZ) ......................................................
Shiprock Agency (AZ) ..............................................................
Nation
Nation
Nation
Nation
Nation
14,892
Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation(SD) ..................................
Cheyenne River Sioux (SD) ............................................................................
Rosebud Sioux Tribe (SD) ..............................................................................
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (ND) .....................................................................
Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux of Lake Traverse Res. (SD) ..................................
Spirit Lake Tribe (Devils Lake Sioux Tribe) (ND) ............................................
7,571
The Hopi Tribe (AZ) .........................................................................................
Pueblo of Acoma .............................................................................................
Pueblo of Chochiti ...........................................................................................
Pueblo of Isleta ................................................................................................
Pueblo of Jemez ..............................................................................................
Pueblo of Laguna ............................................................................................
Pueblo of Nambe .............................................................................................
Pueblo of Picuris ..............................................................................................
Pueblo of Pojoaque .........................................................................................
Pueblo of San Felipe .......................................................................................
Pueblo of San Ildefonso ..................................................................................
Pueblo of San Juan .........................................................................................
Pueblo of Sandia .............................................................................................
Pueblo of Santa Ana .......................................................................................
Pueblo of Santa Clara .....................................................................................
Pueblo of Santo Domingo ...............................................................................
Pueblo of Taos ................................................................................................
Pueblo of Tesuque ..........................................................................................
Pueblo of Zia ...................................................................................................
3,774
Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe (WI) ............................................
Bay Mills (MI) ...................................................................................................
Chippewa-Cree (MT) .......................................................................................
Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa & Chippewa (MI) .........................................
Keweenaw Bay of L’Anse and Ontonagon of Chippewa (MI) .........................
Lac Courte Oreilles of Lake Superior Chippewa (WI) .....................................
10
11
24
4
1
227
Suggested
seats
1,465
251
23
175
165
386
12
5
5
447
38
171
2
7
134
210
151
43
84
Total Hopi and Pueblo Tribes ..................................................................
% Times 15
seats total
2,994
1,280
896
989
797
615
Total Sioux Tribes ....................................................................................
Percent of
total student
count
3,727
3,642
3,216
2,437
1,870
Total Navajo Nation ..................................................................................
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Navajo
Navajo
Navajo
Navajo
Navajo
schools operated either by BIE or by the
tribe through a contract or grant, to
nominate tribal representatives to serve
on the Committee and tribal alternates
to serve when the representative is
unavailable. Based upon the
proportionate share of students, some
tribes similar in affiliation or geography
are grouped together for one seat. It will
be necessary for such nominating tribes
either to co-nominate a single tribal
representative to represent the multitribal jurisdiction or for each tribe in the
multi-tribal jurisdiction to nominate a
representative with the knowledge that
BIE will be able to appoint only one of
the nominees who will then be
responsible for representing the entire
multi-tribal jurisdiction on the
Committee. (See chart below for
jurisdictions.)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Nov 06, 2015
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\09NOP1.SGM
32.70
4.91
5
16.63
2.49
2
8.29
1.24
1
09NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 216 / Monday, November 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Student count
school year
2013–2014
Tribes
Lac du Flambeau of Lake Superior Chippewa (WI) ........................................
Minnesota Chippewa Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake) .........................................
Minnesota Chippewa Fond du Lac Band ........................................................
Minnesota Chippewa Leech Lake Band ..........................................................
Minnesota Chippewa Mille Lacs Band ............................................................
Minnesota Chippewa Red Lake of Chippewa Indians ....................................
Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, MN—6 reservations ............................................
Minnesota Chippewa White Earth Band ..........................................................
Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians (WI) ................................
Saginaw Chippewa (MI) ..................................................................................
Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians (MI) ............................................
Sokaogon Chippewa of Mole Lake Band (Chippewa) (WI) ............................
St. Croix Chippewa Indians (WI) .....................................................................
Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians (ND) ...........................................
3,467
Gila River .........................................................................................................
White Mountain Apache of Fort Apache .........................................................
Tohono O’odham Nation .................................................................................
Mescalero Apache ...........................................................................................
3,542
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (MS) .....................................................
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (NC) .........................................................
2,168
1,040
Total ..........................................................................................................
Suggested
seats
1,094
975
924
549
Total ..........................................................................................................
% Times 15
seats total
13
18
167
143
207
75
17
146
11
4
285
3
12
2,089
Total Chippewa Tribes .............................................................................
Percent of
total student
count
69165
7.61
1.14
1
7.78
1.17
1
3,208
7.04
1.06
1
Total Other Tribes ....................................................................................
12,492
27.43
4.11
4
Total 2013-2014 Student Count ........................................................
45,537
Federal Government—Committee Membership ..............................................
Designated Federal Officer
Office of the Solicitor
Bureau of Indian Education
Department of Education
1
1
1
1
........................
........................
........................
15
Total Federal Committee Members ..........................................................
........................
........................
........................
4
TOTAL AYP Negotiated Rulemaking Committee .....................................
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Total Tribal Committee Members .............................................................
........................
........................
........................
19
Each nomination is expected to
include a nomination for a
representative and an alternate who can
fulfill the obligations of membership
should the representative be unable to
attend. The Committee membership
should also reflect the diversity of tribal
interests, and tribes should nominate
representatives and alternates who will:
• Have knowledge of school
assessments and accountability systems;
• Have relevant experience as past or
present superintendents, principals,
teachers, or school board members, or
possess direct experience with AYP;
• Be able to coordinate, to the extent
possible, with other tribes and schools
who may not be represented on the
Committee;
• Be able to represent the tribe(s) with
the authority to embody tribal views,
communicate with tribal constituents,
and have a clear means to reach
agreement on behalf of the tribe(s);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Nov 06, 2015
Jkt 238001
• Be able to negotiate effectively on
behalf of the tribe(s) represented;
• Be able to commit the time and
effort required to attend and prepare for
meetings; and
• Be able to collaborate among
diverse parties in a consensus-seeking
process.
VI. Submitting Nominations
This notice was previously published
in the Federal Register on January 31,
2013. The evaluation of nominations
received as a result of the previous
notice were conducted and validated for
one year, expiring January 31, 2014.
Representatives who were previously
nominated would need to be renominated in response to this notice.
The Secretary will only consider
nominees nominated through the
process identified in this Federal
Register notice. Nominations received in
any other manner will not be
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
considered. Nominations must include
the following information about each
nominee:
(1) A letter from the Tribe supporting
the nomination of the individual to
serve as a tribal representative for the
Committee;
(2) A resume reflecting the nominee’s
qualifications and experience in Indian
education; resume to include the
nominee’s name, tribal affiliation, job
title, major job duties, employer,
business address, business telephone
and fax numbers (and business email
address, if applicable);
(3) The tribal interest(s) to be
represented by the nominee (see Section
IV, Part F of this notice of intent) and
whether the nominee will represent
other interest(s) related to this
rulemaking, as the tribe may designate;
and
(4) A brief description of how the
nominee will represent tribal views,
E:\FR\FM\09NOP1.SGM
09NOP1
69166
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 216 / Monday, November 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
communicate with tribal constituents,
and have a clear means to reach
agreement on behalf of the tribe(s) they
are representing.
Additionally, a statement on whether
the nominee is only representing one
tribe’s views or whether the expectation
is that the nominee represents a specific
group of tribes.
To be considered, nominations must
be received by the close of business on
the date listed in the DATES section, at
the location indicated in the ADDRESSES
section.
Certification
Officer, Directorate of Oversight and
Compliance, Regulatory and Audit
Matters Office, 9010 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301–9010.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) for this
Federal Register document. The general
policy for comments and other
submissions from members of the public
is to make these submissions available
for public viewing on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
For the above reasons, I hereby certify
that the Adequate Yearly Progress
Negotiated Rulemaking Committee is in
the public interest.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dated: October 29, 2015.
Kevin K. Washburn,
Assistant SecretaryÐIndian Affairs.
Background
[FR Doc. 2015–28379 Filed 11–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 208
[Docket ID: DOD–2013–OS–0021]
RIN 0790–AJ01
National Security Education Program
(NSEP) and NSEP Service Agreement
Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel and Readiness, DoD.
ACTION: Proposed rule
AGENCY:
This proposed rule
implements the responsibilities of the
Secretary of Defense for administering
NSEP and explains the responsibilities
of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel and Readiness (USD (P&R))
for policy and funding oversight for
NSEP. It discusses requirements for
administering and executing the
National Security Education Program
(NSEP) service agreement and; and
assigns oversight of NSEP to the Defense
Language and National Security
Education Office (DLNSEO).
DATES: Comments must be received by
January 8, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and/or RIN
number and title, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Department of Defense, Office
of the Deputy Chief Management
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Nov 06, 2015
Jkt 238001
Alison Patz, 571–256–0771.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The David L. Boren National Security
Education Act of 1991 (Pub. L. 102–
183), as amended, codified at 50 U.S.C.
1901 et seq. (NSEA), mandated that the
Secretary of Defense create and sustain
a program to award scholarships to U.S.
undergraduate students, fellowships to
U.S. graduate students, and grants to
U.S. institutions of higher education.
The NSEP is authorized through 50
U.S.C. 1901–1912 to award
scholarships, fellowships, and grants to
institutions of higher education in order
to increase the quantity, diversity, and
quality of the teaching and learning of
subjects in the fields of foreign
languages, area studies,
counterproliferation studies, and other
international fields that are critical to
the Nation’s interest, as well as to
produce an increased pool of applicants
for working the departments and
agencies of the United States
Government with national security
responsibilities.
NSEP oversees nine national security
language and culture initiatives
designed to attract, recruit, and train a
future federal workforce skilled in
languages and cultures to work across
all agencies involved in national
security. These initiatives support
professional proficiency language
training at U.S. colleges and
universities, as well as support students
to study overseas in regions critical to
U.S. national security through
scholarships and fellowships.
The proposed rule outlines
requirements applicable to the NSEP
office and NSEP award recipients. This
includes information about the NSEP
service agreement, which award
recipients must adhere to as a condition
of award. In exchange for support, NSEP
awardees must work in qualifying
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
national security positions in the U.S.
federal government for at least one year.
Benefits
NSEP, as outlined in the David L.
Boren National Security Education Act
of 1991 (NSEA), oversees multiple
critical initiatives. All of NSEP’s
programs are designed to complement
one another, ensuring that the lessons
learned in one program inform the
approaches of the others. Congress
specifically—and uniquely—structured
NSEP to focus on the combined issues
of language proficiency, national
security, and the needs of the federal
workforce.
NSEA outlines five major purposes for
NSEP, namely:
• To provide the necessary resources,
accountability, and flexibility to meet
the national security education needs of
the United States, especially as such
needs change over time;
• To increase the quantity, diversity,
and quality of the teaching and learning
of subjects in the fields of foreign
languages, area studies,
counterproliferation studies, and other
international fields that are critical to
the nation’s interest;
• To produce an increased pool of
applicants to work in the departments
and agencies of the United States
government with national security
responsibilities;
• To expand, in conjunction with
other federal programs, the international
experience, knowledge base, and
perspectives on which the United States
citizenry, government employees, and
leaders rely; and
• To permit the federal government to
advocate on behalf of international
education.
As a result, NSEP is the only
federally-funded effort focused on the
combined issues of language
proficiency, national security, and the
needs of the federal workforce.
• Boren Scholarships are awarded to
U.S. undergraduates for up to one
academic year of overseas study of
languages and cultures critical to
national security. Boren Scholars
demonstrate their merit for an award in
part by agreeing to fulfill a one year
(minimum) service commitment to the
U.S. government. NSEP awards
approximately 150 Boren Scholarships
annually.
• Boren Fellowships are awarded for
up to two years to U.S. graduate
students who develop independent
projects that combine study of language
and culture in areas critical to national
security. Boren Fellows demonstrate
their merit for an award in part by
agreeing to fulfill a one year (minimum)
E:\FR\FM\09NOP1.SGM
09NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 216 (Monday, November 9, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69161-69166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28379]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
25 CFR Part 30
[167 A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900]
Notice of Intent To Establish a Negotiated Rulemaking Committee
AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Education, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent; request for nominations for tribal
representatives; and comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) is announcing its intent
to establish an Accountability Negotiated Rulemaking Committee
(Committee). The Committee will
[[Page 69162]]
recommend revisions to the existing regulations for BIE's
accountability system. As required by applicable statutes, the
Secretary will select representatives of Indian tribes for the
Committee from among individuals nominated by tribes whose students
attend BIE-funded schools operated by either the BIE or by the tribe
through a contract or grant and who would be affected by a final rule.
The BIE also solicits comments on the proposal to establish the
Committee, including comments on additional interests not identified in
this notice of intent, and invites tribes to nominate representatives
for membership on the Committee.
DATES: Submit nominations for Committee members or written comments on
this notice of intent on or before December 24, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit nominations for Committee members or written
comments on this notice of intent by any of the following methods:
Send comments or nominations to Ms. Sue Bement, Designated
Federal Officer, Bureau of Indian Education, 1011 Indian School Road
NW., Suite 332, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87104; email:
AYPcomments@bia.gov; Telephone: (505) 563-5274; Fax: (505) 563-5281; or
Hand-carry comments or use an overnight courier service to
Manuel Lujan Jr. Building, Building II, Suite 332, 1011 Indian School
Road NW., Suite 332, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87104.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sue Bement, Designated Federal
Officer; Telephone: (505) 563-5274; Fax (505) 563-5281.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA),
student achievement data is used to determine whether schools are
successfully educating their students. Under current law, this
accountability measure is Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). The law
requires States to use a single accountability system for schools to
determine whether all students, as well as individual subgroups of
students, are making progress toward meeting State academic content
standards. The goal, as stated in the ESEA, was to have all students
reaching proficient levels in reading and math by 2014 as measured by
performance on State tests. The ESEA requires the Bureau of Indian
Affairs to promulgate regulations through negotiated rulemaking for the
accountability system to be used in Bureau-funded schools. See 20
U.S.C. 6316(g)(1)(A)(i); 25 U.S.C. 2017-2018.
In 2005, BIA promulgated such regulations. See 70 FR 22178 (April
28, 2005). These regulations, codified at 25 CFR 30.104, require BIE to
use the accountability system of the State in which a BIE-funded school
is located.
The BIE-funded schools are located in 23 different States; and each
State has its own accountability system. As a result, each State system
produces student achievement data that cannot be directly compared with
data from other States. For BIE, comparison is necessary to identify
under-performing schools and direct resources effectively. Regardless
of whether AYP continues to be the accountability measure required
under law, BIE must address this deeply fragmented accountability
system through negotiated rulemaking to create a more cohesive
accountability system.
The BIE had previously developed a method for comparing academic
achievement across States despite the variances in academic standards.
Beginning in 2011, the U.S. Department of Education began to grant
flexibility waivers to States for certain provisions of ESEA, which has
complicated the method BIE uses to effectively compare achievement. It
is necessary, therefore, to revise 25 CFR Part 30, and to receive
recommendations from a negotiated rulemaking committee on how BIE can
compare academic achievement across the 23 States.
This rulemaking would not change the existing authority for tribes
to adopt their own tribal definition of AYP. The BIE encourages tribal
self-determination in Native education, encouraging tribes to develop
alternative accountability systems (and definitions of AYP) and
providing technical assistance. For example, on June 1, 2015, U.S.
Education Secretary Arne Duncan and Interior Secretary Sally Jewell
announced that the Miccosukee Indian School received flexibility from
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to use a definition
of AYP that meets their students' unique academic and cultural needs.
Local tribal communities know best what their children need, and BIE
prioritizes tribal self-determination in Indian education. This
rulemaking aims only to make the existing system more effective and
efficient. It would impact only those BIE-funded schools that do not
wish to develop alternative definitions of AYP, though the option will
remain open to them regardless.
In 2012, BIE conducted four regional meetings on the topic of
accountability in BIE-funded schools. Meetings were held in Oklahoma
City, Oklahoma, on July 17, 2012; Flagstaff, Arizona, on July 20, 2012;
Seattle, Washington, on July 24, 2012; and Bismarck, North Dakota, on
July 27, 2012. Transcripts of those meetings can be referenced at
https://www.bie.edu/consultation/index.htm.
During the four meetings, BIE received feedback from the tribes on
the ESEA Flexibility Request and the BIE's proposed flexibility waiver.
At the consultation sessions, BIE and the tribes discussed adopting
Common Core standards--initially in reading, language arts, and
mathematics--to reflect tribal values and employ a single assessment
system for all BIE-funded schools.
II. Statutory Provisions
The Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1996 (NRA) (5 U.S.C. 561 et seq.);
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2); and
the NCLB (20 U.S.C. 2000 et seq.)
III. The Committee and Its Process
In a negotiated rulemaking, recommended provisions of a proposed
rule are developed by a committee composed of at least one
representative of the Federal Government and representatives of the
interests that will be significantly affected by the rule. Decisions
are made by consensus, which means unanimous concurrence among the
interests represented on the Committee, unless the Committee agrees to
define ``consensus'' to mean a general but not unanimous concurrence,
or agrees upon another specified definition. 5 U.S.C. 562(2)(A) and
(B).
As part of the negotiated rulemaking process, BIE has identified
interests potentially affected by the rulemaking under consideration,
including students enrolled at 174 BIE-funded schools, parents of such
students, school administrators, Tribes, and the Indian communities
served by these schools. By this notice of intent, BIE is soliciting:
(1) comments on its proposal to form a negotiated rulemaking committee;
and (2) nominations for Committee members who will adequately represent
the interests that are likely to be significantly affected by the
proposed rule.
Following the receipt of nominations and comments, BIE will publish
a second notice in the Federal Register with a list of persons to
represent the interests that are likely to be significantly affected by
the rule, and the person or persons proposed to represent BIE. Persons
who will be significantly affected by the proposed rule and who believe
that their interests will not be adequately represented by
[[Page 69163]]
any person specified in that second Federal Register notice will be
given an opportunity to apply or nominate another person for membership
on the negotiated rulemaking committee to represent such interests with
respect to the proposed rule.
Following the second Federal Register notice and responses to it,
BIE expects to establish the Committee. After the Committee reaches
consensus on the recommended provisions of the proposed rule, as
discussed in more detail below, BIE will publish a proposed rule in the
Federal Register.
Under 5 U.S.C. 563, the head of the agency is required to determine
that the use of the negotiated rulemaking procedure is in the public
interest.
In making such a determination, the agency head must consider
certain factors. Taking these factors into account, the Secretary,
through the authority delegated to the Assistant Secretary--Indian
Affairs, has determined that a negotiated rulemaking is in the public
interest because:
1. A rule is needed. The ESEA directs the Secretary to conduct a
negotiated rulemaking pursuant to the NRA. The current definition of
AYP creates a fragmented accountability system that prevents the BIE
from developing and implementing comprehensive school reform
initiatives in the 174 BIE-funded schools with academic programs in 23
States.
2. A limited number of identifiable interests will be significantly
affected by the rule. The 174 BIE-funded schools, students enrolled at
these schools, school teachers and administrators, tribes, and Indian
communities served by these schools will be significantly affected by
this review and the recommendations made by this Committee.
3. There is a reasonable likelihood that the Committee can be
convened with a balanced representation of persons who can adequately
represent the interests discussed in item 2, above, and who are willing
to negotiate in good faith to attempt to reach a consensus on
provisions of a proposed rule.
4. There is a reasonable likelihood that the Committee will reach
consensus on a proposed rule within a fixed period of time.
5. The use of negotiated rulemaking will not unreasonably delay the
development of a proposed rule because time limits will be placed on
the negotiation. We anticipate that these negotiations will expedite a
proposed rule and ultimately the acceptance of a final rule.
6. The BIE is making a commitment to ensure that the Committee has
sufficient resources to complete its work in a timely fashion.
7. The BIE, to the maximum extent possible and consistent with the
legal obligations of the Agency, will use the consensus report of the
Committee as the basis for a proposed rule for public notice and
comment.
IV. Negotiated Rulemaking Procedures
In compliance with FACA and NRA, BIE will use the following
procedures and guidelines for this negotiated rulemaking. The BIE may
modify them in response to comments received on this notice of intent
or during the negotiation process.
A. Committee Formation
The Committee will be formed and operated in full compliance with
the requirements of FACA and NRA, and specifically under the guidelines
of its charter.
B. Membership Responsibility
The Committee is expected to meet approximately 3-5 times. The
meetings will be held at various locations across Indian Country, and
will last 2-3 days each. The initial meeting will be in person; some
later meetings may be held by teleconference and/or web-conference. The
Committee's work is expected to occur over the course of 6-12 months.
However, the Committee may continue its work for a duration of two
years.
Because of the scope and complexity of the tasks at hand, committee
members must be able to invest considerable time and effort in the
negotiated rulemaking process. Committee members must be able to attend
all committee meetings, work on committee work groups, consult with
their constituencies between committee meetings, and negotiate in good
faith toward a consensus on issues before the Committee. Because of the
complexity of the issues under consideration, as well as the need for
continuity, the Secretary reserves the right to replace any member who
is unable to participate in the Committee's meetings.
Responsibility for expenses is stated under 5 U.S.C. 568(c) as
follows:
Members of a negotiated rulemaking committee shall be responsible
for their own expenses of participation in such committee, except that
an Agency may, in accordance with section 7(d) of the FACA, pay for a
member's reasonable travel and per diem expenses, expenses to obtain
technical assistance, and a reasonable rate of compensation, if--
1. Such member certifies a lack of adequate financial resources to
participate in the Committee; and
2. The agency determines that such members participation in the
Committee is necessary to assure an adequate representation of the
members interest.
The BIE commits to pay the reasonable travel and per diem expenses
of Committee members, if appropriate under the NRA and Federal travel
regulations.
C. Composition of Committee
The Secretary is seeking nominations submitted by Tribes for tribal
representatives, consistent with the provisions of 25 U.S.C. 2018, to
serve on the Committee, who have a demonstrated ability to communicate
well with groups about the interests they will represent. The Committee
cannot exceed 25 members, and BIE prefers 15.
Tribal Committee membership must:
Include only representatives of Tribes served by BIE-
funded schools;
Be selected from among individuals nominated by the Tribes
that have students attending BIE-funded schools;
Reflect the proportionate share of students from Tribes
served by the BIE-funded school system; and
Comply with the FACA
Section 2018 of Title 25 also requires the Secretary to ensure that
the various interests affected by the proposed report(s) or rules be
represented on the Committee. In making membership decisions, the
Secretary shall consider whether the interest represented by a nominee
will be affected significantly by the final products of the Committee,
which may include report(s) and/or proposed regulations; whether that
interest is already adequately represented by tribal nominees; and
whether the potential addition would adequately represent that
interest. Federally registered lobbyists are ineligible to serve on all
FACA and non-FACA boards, committees, or councils in an individual
capacity. The term ``individual capacity'' refers to individuals who
are appointed to exercise their own individual best judgment on behalf
of the government, such as when they are designated Special Government
Employees, rather than being appointed to represent a particular
interest.
D. Administrative and Technical Support
The BIE will provide sufficient administrative and technical
resources for the Committee to complete its work in a timely fashion.
The BIE, with the help of the facilitator, will prepare all
[[Page 69164]]
agendas, provide meeting notes, and provide a final report of any
issues on which the Committee reaches consensus.
E. Training and Organization
At the first meeting of the Committee, a neutral facilitator will
provide training on negotiated rulemaking, interests-based
negotiations, consensus-building, and team-building. In addition, at
the first meeting, Committee members will make organizational decisions
concerning protocols, scheduling, and facilitation of the Committee.
F. Interests Identified Through Consultation
Under Section 562 of the NRA, `` `interest' means, with respect to
an issue or matter, multiple parties which have a similar point of view
or which are likely to be affected in a similar manner.'' The BIE has
consulted with BIE personnel and educators at BIE-funded schools.
Through these and previous consultations, such as those conducted in
2012 for an Elementary and Secondary Education Act Flexibility Waiver
Request, BIE has identified interests to be significantly affected by
this new rule that include students enrolled at 174 BIE-funded schools,
parents of such students, school administrators, tribes, and the Indian
communities served by these schools. The BIE is accepting comments
identifying other interests that may be significantly affected by the
final products of the Committee, which may include report(s) and/or
proposed regulations, until the date listed in the DATES section of
this notice of intent.
V. Request for Nominations and Comments
The BIE solicits nominations from tribes whose students attend BIE-
funded schools operated either by BIE or by the tribe through a
contract or grant, to nominate tribal representatives to serve on the
Committee and tribal alternates to serve when the representative is
unavailable. Based upon the proportionate share of students, some
tribes similar in affiliation or geography are grouped together for one
seat. It will be necessary for such nominating tribes either to co-
nominate a single tribal representative to represent the multi-tribal
jurisdiction or for each tribe in the multi-tribal jurisdiction to
nominate a representative with the knowledge that BIE will be able to
appoint only one of the nominees who will then be responsible for
representing the entire multi-tribal jurisdiction on the Committee.
(See chart below for jurisdictions.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Student count Percent of
Tribes school year total student % Times 15 Suggested
2013-2014 count seats total seats
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navajo Nation Tuba City Agency Western (AZ)..... 3,727
Navajo Nation Crown Point Agency Eastern (NM)... 3,642
Navajo Nation Chinle Agency (AZ)................ 3,216
Navajo Nation Fort Defiance Agency (AZ)......... 2,437
Navajo Nation Shiprock Agency (AZ).............. 1,870
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Navajo Nation......................... 14,892 32.70 4.91 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge 2,994
Reservation(SD)................................
Cheyenne River Sioux (SD)....................... 1,280
Rosebud Sioux Tribe (SD)........................ 896
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (ND).................. 989
Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux of Lake Traverse Res. 797
(SD)...........................................
Spirit Lake Tribe (Devils Lake Sioux Tribe) (ND) 615
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Sioux Tribes.......................... 7,571 16.63 2.49 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Hopi Tribe (AZ)............................. 1,465
Pueblo of Acoma................................. 251
Pueblo of Chochiti.............................. 23
Pueblo of Isleta................................ 175
Pueblo of Jemez................................. 165
Pueblo of Laguna................................ 386
Pueblo of Nambe................................. 12
Pueblo of Picuris............................... 5
Pueblo of Pojoaque.............................. 5
Pueblo of San Felipe............................ 447
Pueblo of San Ildefonso......................... 38
Pueblo of San Juan.............................. 171
Pueblo of Sandia................................ 2
Pueblo of Santa Ana............................. 7
Pueblo of Santa Clara........................... 134
Pueblo of Santo Domingo......................... 210
Pueblo of Taos.................................. 151
Pueblo of Tesuque............................... 43
Pueblo of Zia................................... 84
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Hopi and Pueblo Tribes................ 3,774 8.29 1.24 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe (WI).. 10
Bay Mills (MI).................................. 11
Chippewa-Cree (MT).............................. 24
Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa & Chippewa (MI)... 4
Keweenaw Bay of L'Anse and Ontonagon of Chippewa 1
(MI)...........................................
Lac Courte Oreilles of Lake Superior Chippewa 227
(WI)...........................................
[[Page 69165]]
Lac du Flambeau of Lake Superior Chippewa (WI).. 13
Minnesota Chippewa Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake).. 18
Minnesota Chippewa Fond du Lac Band............. 167
Minnesota Chippewa Leech Lake Band.............. 143
Minnesota Chippewa Mille Lacs Band.............. 207
Minnesota Chippewa Red Lake of Chippewa Indians. 75
Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, MN--6 reservations.... 17
Minnesota Chippewa White Earth Band............. 146
Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians 11
(WI)...........................................
Saginaw Chippewa (MI)........................... 4
Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians (MI). 285
Sokaogon Chippewa of Mole Lake Band (Chippewa) 3
(WI)...........................................
St. Croix Chippewa Indians (WI)................. 12
Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians (ND)... 2,089
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Chippewa Tribes....................... 3,467 7.61 1.14 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gila River...................................... 1,094
White Mountain Apache of Fort Apache............ 975
Tohono O'odham Nation........................... 924
Mescalero Apache................................ 549
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 3,542 7.78 1.17 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (MS)........ 2,168
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (NC)........... 1,040
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 3,208 7.04 1.06 1
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Other Tribes.......................... 12,492 27.43 4.11 4
===============================================================
Total 2013-2014 Student Count........... 45,537
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Government--Committee Membership........ Designated Federal Officer 1
Office of the Solicitor 1
Bureau of Indian Education 1
Department of Education 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Tribal Committee Members.............. .............. .............. .............. 15
-------------------------------
Total Federal Committee Members............. .............. .............. .............. 4
===============================
TOTAL AYP Negotiated Rulemaking Committee... .............. .............. .............. 19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each nomination is expected to include a nomination for a
representative and an alternate who can fulfill the obligations of
membership should the representative be unable to attend. The Committee
membership should also reflect the diversity of tribal interests, and
tribes should nominate representatives and alternates who will:
Have knowledge of school assessments and accountability
systems;
Have relevant experience as past or present
superintendents, principals, teachers, or school board members, or
possess direct experience with AYP;
Be able to coordinate, to the extent possible, with other
tribes and schools who may not be represented on the Committee;
Be able to represent the tribe(s) with the authority to
embody tribal views, communicate with tribal constituents, and have a
clear means to reach agreement on behalf of the tribe(s);
Be able to negotiate effectively on behalf of the tribe(s)
represented;
Be able to commit the time and effort required to attend
and prepare for meetings; and
Be able to collaborate among diverse parties in a
consensus-seeking process.
VI. Submitting Nominations
This notice was previously published in the Federal Register on
January 31, 2013. The evaluation of nominations received as a result of
the previous notice were conducted and validated for one year, expiring
January 31, 2014. Representatives who were previously nominated would
need to be re-nominated in response to this notice. The Secretary will
only consider nominees nominated through the process identified in this
Federal Register notice. Nominations received in any other manner will
not be considered. Nominations must include the following information
about each nominee:
(1) A letter from the Tribe supporting the nomination of the
individual to serve as a tribal representative for the Committee;
(2) A resume reflecting the nominee's qualifications and experience
in Indian education; resume to include the nominee's name, tribal
affiliation, job title, major job duties, employer, business address,
business telephone and fax numbers (and business email address, if
applicable);
(3) The tribal interest(s) to be represented by the nominee (see
Section IV, Part F of this notice of intent) and whether the nominee
will represent other interest(s) related to this rulemaking, as the
tribe may designate; and
(4) A brief description of how the nominee will represent tribal
views,
[[Page 69166]]
communicate with tribal constituents, and have a clear means to reach
agreement on behalf of the tribe(s) they are representing.
Additionally, a statement on whether the nominee is only
representing one tribe's views or whether the expectation is that the
nominee represents a specific group of tribes.
To be considered, nominations must be received by the close of
business on the date listed in the DATES section, at the location
indicated in the ADDRESSES section.
Certification
For the above reasons, I hereby certify that the Adequate Yearly
Progress Negotiated Rulemaking Committee is in the public interest.
Dated: October 29, 2015.
Kevin K. Washburn,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2015-28379 Filed 11-6-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
