Impact Aid Programs, 81477-81494 [2015-32618]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
• Name of the establishment or
organization each individual represents,
if any;
• Occupational title and position of
each individual testifying;
• Approximate amount of time
required for each individual’s
testimony;
• A brief statement of the position
each individual will take with respect to
the issues raised by the proposed rule;
and
• A brief summary of documentary
evidence each individual intends to
present.
Participants who need projectors and
other special equipment for their
testimony must contact Gretta Jameson
at OSHA’s Office of Communications,
telephone (202) 693–2176, no later than
one week before the hearing begins.
OSHA emphasizes that the hearing is
open to the public; however, only
individuals who file a notice of
intention to appear may question
witnesses and participate fully at the
hearing. If time permits, and at the
discretion of the ALJ, an individual who
did not file a notice of intention to
appear may be allowed to testify at the
hearing, but for no more than 10
minutes.
Hearing testimony and documentary
evidence. Individuals who request more
than 10 minutes to present their oral
testimony at the hearing or who will
submit documentary evidence at the
hearing must submit (transmit, send,
postmark, deliver) the full text of their
testimony and all documentary
evidence no later than January 29, 2016.
The Agency will review each
submission and determine if the
information it contains warrants the
amount of time the individual requested
for the presentation. If OSHA believes
the requested time is excessive, the
Agency will allocate an appropriate
amount of time for the presentation. The
Agency also may limit to 10 minutes the
presentation of any participant who fails
to comply substantially with these
procedural requirements, and may
request that the participant return for
questioning at a later time. Before the
hearing, OSHA will notify participants
of the time the Agency will allow for
their presentation and, if less than
requested, the reasons for its decision.
In addition, before the hearing, OSHA
will provide the hearing procedures and
hearing schedule to each participant
who filed a notice of intention to
appear.
Certification of the hearing record and
Agency final determination. Following
the close of the hearing and the posthearing comment periods, the ALJ will
certify the record to the Assistant
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health. The record will
consist of all of the written comments,
oral testimony, and documentary
evidence received during the
proceeding. The ALJ, however, will not
make or recommend any decisions as to
the content of the final standard.
Following certification of the record,
OSHA will review all the evidence
received into the record and will issue
the final rule based on the record as a
whole.
Authority and Signature
This document was prepared under
the direction of David Michaels, Ph.D.,
MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210,
pursuant to section 6(b) of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970 (29 U.S.C. 655(b)), Secretary of
Labor’s Order 1–2012 (77 FR 3912), and
29 CFR part 1911.
Signed at Washington, DC, on December
23, 2015.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2015–32764 Filed 12–29–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Part 222
RIN 1810–AB24
[ED–2015–OESE–0109]
Impact Aid Programs
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Secretary proposes to
amend the Impact Aid Program
regulations issued under title VIII of the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA or ‘‘the
Act’’). The proposed regulations govern
Impact Aid payments to local
educational agencies (LEAs). The
program, in general, provides assistance
for maintenance and operations costs to
LEAs that are affected by Federal
activities. These proposed regulations
would update, clarify, and improve the
current regulations.
DATES: We must receive your comments
on or before February 16, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81477
or hand delivery. We will not accept
comments submitted by fax or by email
or those submitted after the comment
period. To ensure that we do not receive
duplicate copies, please submit your
comments only once. In addition, please
include the Docket ID at the top of your
comments.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov to submit your
comments electronically. Information
on using Regulations.gov, including
instructions for accessing agency
documents, submitting comments, and
viewing the docket, is available on the
site under the help tab at ‘‘How To Use
Regulations.gov.’’
• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery,
or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver
your comments about these proposed
regulations, address them to Kristen
Walls-Rivas, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Room 3C103, Washington, DC 20202–
6244.
Privacy Note: The Department’s
policy for comments received from
members of the public is to make these
submissions available for public
viewing in their entirety on the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore,
commenters should be careful to
include in their comments only
information that they wish to make
publicly available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kristen Walls-Rivas, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Room 3C103, Washington, DC 20202–
6244. Telephone: (202) 260–3858 or by
email: Impact.Aid@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877–
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation To Comment: We invite
you to submit comments regarding these
proposed regulations. We specifically
invite you to comment on the ways in
which school districts can collect data
for counting federally-connected
children for Impact Aid purposes, under
proposed § 222.35; the proposed
changes to the Indian policies and
procedures (IPPs) in §§ 222.91 and
222.94–95; and the proposed changes to
the equalization disparity test in
§ 222.162. Regarding the first of those
topics, we invite comment on the
following specific questions:
• Are there alternative methods for
counting federal-connected children
besides the parent-pupil survey form or
source check collection tools, either in
use or that you propose?
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
81478
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
• What types of technical assistance
would you like the Department to
provide to properly educate and inform
LEAs on the two regulatory methods of
data collection, or on other methods?
• Can you propose ways in which
online or electronic data collection
might be used to facilitate the data
collection process? This may include
but is not limited to the electronic
collection of parent-pupil survey forms
and the use of student information
systems for Impact Aid data collection.
To ensure that your comments have
maximum effect in developing the final
regulations, we urge you to identify
clearly the specific section or sections of
the proposed regulations that each of
your comments addresses and to arrange
your comments in the same order as the
proposed regulations.
We invite you to assist us in
complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866
and 13563 and their overall requirement
of reducing regulatory burden that
might result from these proposed
regulations. Please let us know of any
further ways we could reduce potential
costs or increase potential benefits
while preserving the effective and
efficient administration of the
Department’s programs and activities.
During and after the comment period,
you may inspect all public comments
about these proposed regulations by
accessing Regulations.gov. You may also
inspect the comments in person at 400
Maryland Avenue SW., Washington,
DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.,
Washington, DC time, Monday through
Friday of each week except Federal
holidays. Please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Assistance to Individuals With
Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request we will
provide an appropriate accommodation
or auxiliary aid to an individual with a
disability who needs assistance to
review the comments or other
documents in the public rulemaking
record for these proposed regulations. If
you want to schedule an appointment
for this type of accommodation or
auxiliary aid, please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Background
The Secretary proposes to amend
certain regulations in part 222 of title 34
of the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR). The regulations in 34 CFR part
222 pertain to the Impact Aid Program
and implement Title VIII of the ESEA.
The purpose of this regulatory action is
to update the current regulations in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
response to statutory changes and
related issues that have arisen, as many
of the regulations for this section have
not been updated since 1995; to
improve clarity and transparency
regarding Federal program operations;
and to improve the LEA’s application
processes to generate a more accurate
data collection, which will facilitate
more timely Impact Aid payments. The
Department published final technical
amendments for this program on June
11, 2015, deleting obsolete provisions
and incorporating statutory changes that
did not require notice and comment.
These proposed regulations contain
provisions on which we seek comment
from the public.
Tribal Consultation: Before
developing these proposed regulations,
the Department held two nationally
accessible tribal consultation
teleconferences on July 15, 2015, and
July 28, 2015, pursuant to Executive
Order 13175 (’’Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments’’), to solicit tribal input on
the Impact Aid program regulations
broadly, and specifically on the
provisions that affect LEAs that claim
students living on Indian lands. The
Impact Aid Program announced the
consultation teleconferences via the
Office of Indian Education’s listserv on
July 2, 2015, and July 14, 2015. During
the webinars, the attendees discussed a
range of topics, including Indian lands
property verification and data
collection, IPPs, and IPP waivers. The
Impact Aid Program received the most
feedback on the regulations concerning
IPPs, IPP waivers, and remedies for noncompliance with IPPs.
There was a concern among many
consultation participants that LEAs are
not implementing IPPs with the degree
of seriousness intended by the law and
Impact Aid program regulations.
Commenters wished to see LEAs focus
more attention on equal participation of
Indian students in all educational
programs, including Advanced
Placement courses, sports, and other
extra-curricular activities. Some
participants were concerned that LEAs
do not provide sufficient time for tribes
or parents to review data regarding
participation of Indian children in the
LEAs’ programs; others stated that some
LEAs provide outdated data to tribal
leaders.
In addition, participants sought more
guidance on the standard for meaningful
input from tribal officials and parents of
Indian children. Commenters were
further concerned that there is no
requirement in the current Impact Aid
regulations that tribes review and affirm
that an LEA is in compliance with the
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
content in the IPP before it is submitted
to the Department for review. Others
stated that tribes are not receiving
copies of IPPs at all. Many commenters
felt that some LEAs provide tribal
leaders and parents of Indian children
insufficient notice of meetings.
There was also a general concern
among many participants that the
current remedy for non-compliance
with IPPs, the withholding of an LEA’s
Impact Aid payments, is unhelpful,
because withholding all funds would
have a negative effect on Indian
children. Others stated that the IPP
complaint process is highly adversarial;
they wished to see an intermediate step,
such as a requirement that the LEA and
tribal leaders attend a mediation session
before a complaint is submitted to the
Department. Commenters indicated that
tribes would also like to be informed
when the Department finds that an LEA
serving children on the tribe’s land is
out of compliance with the IPP
requirements.
With regard to the current program
regulations regarding an LEA’s ability to
submit a waiver from a tribe in lieu of
IPPs, commenters expressed the concern
that tribes may be waiving rights
without informed knowledge about
what they are waiving.
The Impact Aid Program also heard
comments about the verification of
students living on Indian lands.
Participants were concerned that LEAs
were not providing sufficient time for
tribal officials to confirm that the
students in question resided on Indian
land. Participants also stated that it
would be helpful for them and for the
officials certifying Indian land to have
customized training that focuses on the
Impact Aid program’s requirements.
The Department considered the views
gathered during the tribal consultation
process in developing these proposed
regulations. Specifically, proposed
provisions regarding IPPs and waivers
of IPPs (§§ 222.91, 222.94, and 222.95)
reflect this input.
Applicability of the Every Student
Succeeds Act
On December 10, 2015, the President
signed the Every Student Succeeds Act
(ESSA), Public Law 114–95, 129 Stat.
1802 (2015), which amends the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (ESEA). The ESSA includes
Impact Aid amendments (see new title
VII of the ESEA, formerly title VIII),
which take effect starting with fiscal
year 2017 payments. Pub. L . 114–95,
§ 5(d). These proposed regulations are
not directly affected by the ESSA. The
statutory provisions underlying each
regulatory provision in this document
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
were not affected in a relevant manner
by the ESSA. We plan to make any
conforming references needed,
including authority citations, in the
final regulations. The Department will
be considering in the near future
whether further changes to the Impact
Aid regulations are needed due to the
ESSA.
Summary of Proposed Changes
These proposed changes would:
• Amend the definition of
‘‘membership’’ in § 222.2 to clarify that
an eligible student in membership must
live in the same State as the LEA except
in certain circumstances.
• Amend §§ 222.3 and 222.5 to
change the date by which an LEA may
amend its application from September
30 to June 30 of the year preceding the
Federal fiscal year for which it seeks
assistance.
• Amend § 222.22 to reflect a
statutory change that would include
payments in lieu of taxes (PILTs) and
revenues from other Federal sources in
the calculation of compensation from
Federal activities, for purposes of
determining eligibility and payments
under section 8002 of the ESEA.
• Amend § 222.23 to replace the
current provision with a new provision
that describes how LEAs formerly
eligible for section 8002 grants, that
have consolidated with another LEA,
are treated with respect to section 8002
grant payments.
• Amend § 222.30 to exclude Federal
charter school startup funds from the
analysis of whether Federal funds
provide a substantial portion of the
educational program, for purposes of
determining an LEA’s eligibility.
• Amend § 222.35 to specify certain
unusual circumstances in which
someone other than a parent or legal
guardian may sign a parent-pupil survey
form and to require the use of source
check forms to document children
residing on Indian lands or in low-rent
housing.
• Amend § 222.37 to clarify the
options for reporting average daily
attendance and to make them available
to all States.
• Amend § 222.40 to require that an
SEA submit the rationale for the
additional factors selected to identify
generally comparable districts and
describe how those factors affect the
cost of educating students.
• Amend § 222.91 to add a
requirement for an LEA claiming
children residing on Indian lands to
include with its application an
assurance that the LEA has responded
in writing to input from the tribes and
parents of Indian children received
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
during the IPP consultation process,
prior to submitting the application for
Impact Aid.
• Amend § 222.94 to add a
requirement that LEAs claiming
children residing on Indian lands
respond in writing to input obtained
from parents of Indian children and
tribal officials during the IPP
consultation process, disseminate these
responses to the parents of Indian
children and tribal officials prior to
submission of the Impact Aid
application, and provide a copy of the
IPPs to the tribe; and changing from 60
to 90 days the time period in which an
LEA must amend its IPPs based on its
own determination after obtaining tribal
input.
• Amend § 222.95 to allow the
Department to withhold all or part of
the Impact Aid payment from an LEA
that is not in compliance with the
requirements of § 222.94, and changing
from 60 to 90 days the time within
which LEAs must revise IPPs in
response to Department notification.
• Amend § 222.161 to give the SEA
the ability to request permission from
the Secretary to make estimated State
aid payments that consider an LEA’s
Impact Aid payment in the event that
the Department does not make an
equalization determination before the
start of an SEA’s fiscal year.
Significant Proposed Regulations
We discuss substantive issues under
the sections of the proposed regulations
to which they pertain. Generally, we do
not address proposed regulatory
changes that are technical or otherwise
minor in effect.
§ 222.2
part?
What definitions apply to this
Membership
Statute: Section 8003 of the ESEA
provides that payments are based on the
number of eligible children in average
daily attendance in schools of the LEA.
The definition of ‘‘average daily
attendance’’ in section 9101(1) of the
ESEA provides in part that average daily
membership can be converted to average
daily attendance.
Current Regulations: Paragraph (3) of
the current definition of ‘‘membership’’
in § 222.2 excludes four categories of
students.
Proposed Regulation: The proposed
regulation adds an additional exclusion
to paragraph (3) of the definition of
‘‘membership.’’ Under the proposed
provision, LEAs could not claim
students who reside in a different State,
unless the circumstances described in
section 8010(c) of the Act apply, or
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81479
unless the student is covered under a
formal State enrollment or tuition
agreement.
Reasons: LEAs have sometimes
attempted to claim children who reside
in another State but attend school in the
LEA. Children who reside in one State
and attend school in a different State are
generally excluded from Impact Aid
eligibility by the current regulations
because eligible students must be
supported by State aid, and States
typically do not provide State aid for the
education of children who reside in
other states. The proposed regulation
would clarify this rule and provide the
two exceptions to it: One is statutory
(section 8010(c)) and the other is a
situation in which children are covered
under a formal written tuition or
enrollment agreement between two
States.
Parent Employed on Federal Property
Statute: Under section 8003 of the
Act, several categories of eligible
children include those who resided
with a parent who is employed on
Federal property.
Current Regulation: Paragraph (1)(i) of
the current definition of ‘‘parent
employed on Federal property’’ in
§ 222.2 provides that a parent employed
on Federal property is a parent who is
employed by the Federal government
and reports to work on Federal property
or whose place of work is on Federal
property.
Proposed Regulation: The proposed
regulation would clarify the definition
of ‘‘parent employed on Federal
property’’ by revising paragraph (1)(i) so
it specifically includes parents
employed by the Federal government
but who report to an alternate duty
station, such as a telework location, on
the survey date.
Paragraph (1)(ii) would not change;
paragraph (1)(iii) would be deleted.
Finally, paragraph (2) of the definition
would be amended to further clarify that
children whose parent’s job includes
providing services on a Federal
property, but who are not Federal
employees and whose duty station is
not on the Federal property, are not
eligible to be counted for Impact Aid.
Reason: The Telework Enhancement
Act of 2010 has increased the number of
Federal employees who telework on a
regular basis. The proposed change to
paragraph (1)(i) of the regulation is
intended to include the children of
Federal employees who might otherwise
not be considered eligible for Impact
Aid purposes because they telework. We
propose deleting the provision in
paragraph (1)(iii) because the provision
is obsolete. LEAs have not used this
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
81480
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
provision since it was effective and the
Department does not foresee it being
needed in the future. We propose the
revision to paragraph (2) to clarify
further that parents who provide
services to a Federal property, but who
are not Federal employees and whose
main duty station is not located on
Federal property, are not eligible under
the definition of ‘‘parent employed on
Federal property.’’
§ 222.3 How does a local educational
agency apply for assistance under
section 8002 or 8003 of the Act?
Statute: Section 8005 of the Act
governs the submission of applications
for payments under sections 8002 and
8003 of the Act.
Current Regulations: The current
regulation describes how an LEA
applies for assistance under sections
8002 and 8003 of the Act. Section
222.3(b)(2) provides that, under the
exceptional circumstances described in
§ 222.3(b)(1), an LEA must file its
application either 60 days following the
event or by September 30 of the Federal
fiscal year preceding the year for which
it seeks assistance, whichever comes
later.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed
regulation would change the application
deadline in § 222.3(b)(2) for LEAs with
exceptional circumstances from
September 30 to June 30 under section
8002 and 8003.
Reasons: The proposed regulatory
change would make § 222.3(b)(2)
consistent with the proposed changes in
§ 222.5, in which the Department
proposes to change the application
amendment deadline from September
30 to June 30. See the discussion of
proposed § 222.5 directly below for the
reasons for that change.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 222.5 When may a local educational
agency amend its application?
Statute: Section 8005 of the Act
governs the submission of applications
for payments under sections 8002 and
8003 of the Act.
Current Regulations: Under
§ 222.5(a)(2), an LEA may amend its
application for situations described in
§ 222.3(b)(1) by September 30 following
the January application deadline. In
addition, § 222.5(b) permits an LEA that
did not have data available at the time
it filed its application, such as after a
second membership count, to amend its
application by September 30.
Proposed Regulations: The
Department proposes to change the
amendment deadlines in §§ 222.5(a)(2)
and 222.5(b)(2) from September 30 to
June 30.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
Reasons: The National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2013
mandates that Impact Aid payments be
made no later than two years after the
funds are appropriated. Many LEAs
submit their applications in January of
each year showing incomplete counts of
eligible children and submit
amendments as late as September 30 to
provide complete and accurate
information. This procedure inhibits the
Department’s ability to review the
applications and prepare initial
payments. A June 30th amendment
deadline will ensure that the
Department receives complete
application information for the review
of data and release of funds in a timely
manner.
§ 222.22 How does the Secretary treat
compensation from Federal activities
for purposes of determining eligibility
and payment?
Statute: Section 8002(a) of the Act
provides that an LEA is not eligible for
a payment under section 8002 if it is
substantially compensated for the loss
in revenue resulting from Federal
ownership of land. Compensation is
measured by increases in revenue from
the conduct of Federal activities, but the
statute does not define ‘‘substantial
compensation.’’ Section 8002(b)
contains a maximum payment provision
that takes into account the amount of
revenue received by the LEA from
activities conducted on Federal
property; those revenues specifically
include payments received from any
Federal agency other than the
Department or education-related
payments from the Department of
Defense (DOD).
Current Regulation: For purposes of
determining an LEA’s eligibility and
maximum payment under section 8002,
the current regulations provide in
§ 222.22 that an LEA is substantially
compensated if its other Federal
revenue exceeds its maximum payment
amount under Section 8002. In
§ 222.22(d) the regulation excludes from
‘‘other Federal revenue’’ only payments
from the DOD.
Proposed Regulation: Proposed
§ 222.22(b)(1) would specifically
include payments in lieu of taxes
(PILTS) received from any other Federal
agencies in the amount of revenue
received by the LEA from activities
conducted on Federal property, for
purposes of determining an LEA’s
eligibility for, and amount of, payment
under section 8002 of the Act.
Reasons: This proposed revision
would conform with the statutory
requirements for calculating the revenue
received by an LEA, in determining both
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
eligibility and the maximum payment
under section 8002 of the Act. The
proposed regulation would specify that
PILTs, which are payments from other
Federal agencies, are part of revenues
considered for eligibility and maximum
payment purposes. In addition, by
including, in proposed paragraph (b)(1),
payments received by any other Federal
agency, that means we do not take into
account Federal funds from the
Department, consistent with the statute
and with current Department practice.
§ 222.23 How are consolidated local
educational agencies treated for the
purposes of eligibility and payment
under section 8002?
Statute: Section 8002(g) of the Act
contains provisions granting eligibility
to certain districts that consolidated
from two or more former districts prior
to 1995. The Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2014 (Pub. L.
113–76) amended this provision to also
permit LEAs that consolidated after
2005 to receive a section 8002
foundation payment if one of the former
districts was eligible for section 8002
funds for the fiscal year prior to
consolidation.
Current Regulation: There is no
current regulation regarding the
eligibility of consolidated districts. The
current regulation at § 222.23 contains
the previous formula for calculating a
section 8002 payment under statutory
provisions that have been replaced.
Proposed Regulation: We propose to
remove § 222.23 in its entirety and
replace it with the proposed regulatory
language regarding consolidated
districts. The new regulation would
clarify which consolidated LEAs are
eligible, what documentation is
necessary to prove eligibility, and how
foundation payments are calculated for
consolidated districts when more than
one former district qualifies. The
regulation would also clarify that
consolidated LEAs remain eligible for
section 8002 funds as long as the
amount of Federal land in at least one
former LEA upon which eligibility is
based (i.e. the LEA that was eligible for
Section 8002 funds in the prior fiscal
year) comprises at least 10 percent of
the taxable value of the former LEA at
the time of Federal acquisition.
Reasons: The 2014 statutory change
created a new category of school
districts that qualify for section 8002
grant funds, and this regulation would
clarify the eligibility and payment for
these districts, as well as for districts
eligible under the previous statutory
provision. The proposed regulation will
require that the consolidated district
still contains, within the boundaries of
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
one of its former districts, Federal
property that comprises at least 10
percent of the taxable value of the
former LEA at the time of Federal
acquisition. This is to ensure that an
LEA will not receive both tax revenue
and section 8002 funds for the same
property, if a significant amount of
previously-eligible Federal land within
the boundaries of the former district has
been sold and is no longer prohibited
from being taxed.
The regulation would also provide
that an eligible consolidated LEA
receives only a foundation payment and
not any ‘‘remaining funds.’’ Remaining
funds require submission of data by
LEAs to calculate a maximum payment,
and a consolidated LEA’s payment is
based only on the last payment received
by a former LEA, so there is no
documentation available with which to
calculate a maximum payment. The
provisions that are proposed in this
section reflect current Department
practice.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 222.24 How does a local educational
agency that has multiple tax rates for
real property classifications derive a
single real property tax rate?
Statute: Section 8002(b)(2) of the Act
requires the Secretary to use an LEA’s
current levied real property tax rate for
current expenditures in calculating an
LEA’s maximum payment amount
under section 8002 of the Act.
Current Regulation: None.
Proposed Regulation: This proposed
new regulation would describe how an
LEA with multiple tax rates for different
property classifications derives a single
tax rate. Essentially, the LEA divides the
total revenues it received from property
taxes by the assessed valuation of the
property in the LEA.
Reasons: The statutory formula
requires a single tax rate for an LEA.
Taxing jurisdictions often set different
tax rates for each type of property,
resulting in multiple tax rates within an
LEA. This provision would mandate a
standardized arithmetic procedure to
determine a single tax rate under section
8002, and reflects current practice.
§ 222.30 What is ‘‘free public
education’’?
Statute: Section 8013(6) of the Act
defines ‘‘free public education.’’ The
definition includes the requirement that
education must be at public expense,
under public supervision and direction,
and without tuition charge.
Current Regulations: The current
regulatory definition of ‘‘free public
education’’ in § 222.30(2)(ii) states in
relevant part that education is provided
at public expense if Federal funds, other
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
than Impact Aid funds, do not
constitute a substantial portion of the
educational program.
Proposed Regulation: The proposed
regulation would exclude Federal
charter school startup grant funds (Title
V, part B, subpart I) from the calculation
of the Federal portion that funds an
LEA’s educational program. The
regulation would also add a provision
clarifying that the Secretary analyzes
whether a substantial portion of the
education program is funded by Federal
sources by comparing the LEA’s
finances to other LEAs in the State.
Reasons: Under section 8003(a) of the
Act, an LEA can only claim students for
Impact Aid if the LEA provides a free
public education to those students.
Section 8003 Impact Aid funds are
intended to replace lost local revenues
due to Federal activity. Under the
current regulations, if Federal funds are
providing for the educational program
(e.g. schools funded by the Department
of Interior), then the lack of local tax
revenue is already being compensated
by another Federal source. As a result,
the LEA is not eligible for Impact Aid
for those students.
The proposed regulation would also
exclude charter school startup funds
from the calculation of whether Federal
funds provide a substantial portion of
an LEA’s program. These funds are
generally available in the first two years
of a charter school’s operations; they
can be used for a host of purposes other
than current expenditures, and they are
not long-term funding sources.
Under the proposed regulation, in
analyzing the portion of the education
program that is funded by Federal
sources, the Department would compare
the LEA’s finances to other LEAs in the
State to account for the circumstances
unique to the State.
§ 222.32 What information does the
Secretary use to determine a local
educational agency’s basic support
payment?
Statute: Section 8005(b)(1) of the Act
specifies that an LEA must submit an
application that includes information
for the Secretary to be able to determine
the LEA’s eligibility and payment
amount.
Current Regulations: Section
222.32(b) requires that an LEA must
submit its federally connected
membership based on a student count
described in §§ 222.33 through 222.35 of
the regulations.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed
regulation would clarify that the LEA
must submit its federally connected
membership count in its timely and
complete annual application.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81481
Reasons: The proposed regulation
would clarify that each LEA must
include an accurate membership count
in its application by the deadline of
January 31. In recent years, the
Department’s Impact Aid field reviews
of LEAs have revealed that some
applicants submitted estimated data on
the section 8003 Impact Aid
application, and then relied on the
amendment process to provide the
actual counted data. Accurate
application information must be
submitted before the program can
review the application and calculate
payments. If LEAs submit estimated
data and rely on the amendment process
to provide accurate data, the Impact Aid
Program is delayed in processing
payments to all districts.
§ 222.33 When must an applicant
make its membership count?
Statute: Section 8003 of the Act does
not directly address when an LEA must
make its membership count. The
Secretary has the authority to regulate
when an LEA calculates its membership
under 20 U.S.C. 1221–e and 3474.
Current Regulations: The current
regulation refers to the ‘‘first or only’’
membership count.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed
regulation would remove the reference
to the first or only membership count.
Additionally, the proposed regulation
would clarify that the data from the only
membership count must be complete by
the application deadline.
Reasons: The proposed regulatory
change in § 222.34 (see below) would
eliminate the current regulatory option
of a second membership count. That
change in turn would eliminate the
need to reference first or only
membership count, since there would
be only one count. The proposed
language in § 222.33(c) stating that the
LEA must complete its membership
count by the application deadline
supports the proposed changes in
§ 222.32 that would help to ensure
submission of a complete application by
the deadline.
§ 222.34 If an applicant makes a
second membership count, when must
that count be made?
Statute: Section 8003 of the Act does
not directly address when an LEA must
make its membership count. The
Secretary has the authority to regulate
when an LEA calculates its membership
under 20 U.S.C. 1221–e and 3474.
Current Regulations: The current
regulation describes the process for
undertaking a second membership
survey.
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
81482
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Proposed Regulations: The proposed
regulations would delete this provision
and reserve the section for future use.
Reasons: This provision has become
obsolete over time. The second
membership survey provision has not
been used since 2012 and at that time
it was used by only two LEAs. This
change would streamline the review
process to support timely and accurate
payments. Allowing second
membership surveys late in the year
causes delays in the review process and
potentially delays payment. The
Department has determined that the
impact of removing this provision is low
and the benefits outweigh any foreseen
consequence.
§ 222.35 How does a local educational
agency count the membership of its
federally connected children?
Statute: Section 8005(b)(1) of the Act
specifies that an LEA must submit an
application that includes information
for the Secretary to be able to determine
the LEA’s eligibility and payment
amount.
Current Regulations: The current
regulation describes the information
required on a parent-pupil survey form
and on a source check form.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed
regulation would reorganize paragraph
(a) regarding parent-pupil survey forms,
to first list the information required for
all types of children, followed by
specific requirements for certain
categories of children. In addition,
proposed paragraph (a)(4) would clarify
for LEAs the rare situations in which an
LEA may accept a parent-pupil survey
form that is not signed by a parent or
legal guardian. The regulation also
would clarify that the Department will
not accept parent-pupil survey forms
signed by an employee of the LEA,
unless the employee is a parent of a
child attending school within the LEA,
signing their own child’s form.
Proposed paragraph (b) pertains to
source check documents, which are a
data collection alternative to the parentpupil survey form. The proposed
regulations would require source check
documents for children residing on
Indian lands and for children residing
in eligible low-rent housing. Under the
proposed regulation, the source check
forms must contain sufficient
information to verify the eligibility of
both the Federal property and the
individual children claimed on the
source check form.
Reasons: With regard to parent-pupil
survey forms, recent Impact Aid field
reviews of LEAs have revealed instances
of LEA staff members signing forms for
parents or verifying the information by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
phone, without a parent signature on
the form. The proposed revisions to
paragraph (a) would clarify the
requirements and provide examples of
the few unusual situations in which
someone other than a parent may sign
a parent-pupil survey form. In no
instance would an employee of the LEA
be permitted to sign a form for a parent.
These proposed changes reflect current
Department policy.
Paragraph (b) would be revised to
require that LEAs claiming children
who reside on Indian lands, and
children who reside in low-rent
housing, use a source check document
to obtain the data required to determine
the children’s eligibility. The parentpupil survey form is insufficient to
document the different types of eligible
Indian lands property and low-rent
housing property and confirm that
property’s eligibility, because parents
are unlikely to have the necessary
documentation or information. In order
to ensure accurate and timely eligibility
and payment determinations, LEAs
need to reach out directly to the
government entities (e.g. for Indian
lands—tribal officials, Bureau of Indian
Affairs (BIA) staff, and/or tax assessors;
for low-rent housing—the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and/or local
housing authorities) who have access to
the records that document the legal
status of a specific parcel of land and
can certify that the status is consistent
with the Federal property definition.
§ 222.37 How does the Secretary
calculate the average daily attendance
of federally connected children?
Statute: Section 8003 the Act requires
that payments be based on the average
daily attendance (ADA) of federally
connected children. Section 9101(1) of
the Act defines ADA.
Current Regulations: The current
regulations describe the process for
calculating ADA for LEAs that reside in
States that use actual ADA when
determining State aid, and for LEAs that
reside in States where something other
than ADA is used to calculate State aid.
The current regulations also describe
other options for LEAs or States if the
State does not use ADA for determining
State aid, including the use of a State
average attendance ratio (which has
informally been referred to as a
‘‘negotiated ratio,’’), sampling, or the
use of data similar to ADA.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed
regulation would reorganize this section
so that the options for LEAs, the States,
and the Secretary are grouped together
by actor. The proposed regulation
would allow any State to ask the
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Secretary for a State average attendance
ratio. In addition, in cases where there
is reliable public data, the Secretary
may calculate a State average attendance
ratio.
Reasons: Use of a State average
attendance ratio typically benefits most
LEAs and those that do not benefit have
the option to submit actual attendance
data to obtain a higher payment.
Currently, 35 States have a State average
attendance ratio. The proposed change
would give LEAs in all States the
opportunity to use a State average
attendance ratio and alternative options
for obtaining an attendance rate. This
would reduce the LEAs’ data collection
burden and provide more options for
each LEA to obtain a higher attendance
rate, which may typically result in a
higher Impact Aid payment.
§ 222.40 What procedures does a State
educational agency use for certain local
educational agencies to determine
generally comparable local educational
agencies using additional factors, for
local contribution rate purposes?
Statute: Section 8003(b)(1) of the Act
contains the formula for determining an
LEA’s maximum payment amount,
based in part on calculating each LEA’s
local contribution rate (LCR). The
statute states that the LCR is to be
determined under the procedures set
forth in the Department’s regulations as
they were in effect on January 1, 1994.
Current Regulations: The current
regulations in § 222.39–§ 222.41 provide
that an LEA’s LCR is determined by
identifying generally comparable
districts. Under § 222.40, for certain
qualifying LEAs, the SEA may use
additional factors in identifying the
generally comparable LEAs for the
purpose of calculating and certifying an
LCR. Section 222.40(d) provides that if
an SEA proposes to use a special
additional factor to select a group of
generally comparable districts (GCDs) to
support a higher LCR for a specific LEA,
it must be a generally accepted,
objectively defined factor that affects the
LEA’s cost of educating its students.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed
regulation would clarify that SEAs that
wish to use special additional factors to
identify GCDs for purposes of
calculating a higher LCR for certain
LEAs must provide a rationale and
explain how the selected factor or
factors affect the cost of education. The
proposed regulation does not
substantively alter the manner in which
the LCRs are calculated.
Reasons: To determine GCDs for local
contribution rate purposes, an SEA may
use a special additional factor only if
that factor has an impact on the cost of
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
education for an LEA. In the past, the
Department has had to contact the SEA
to learn the rationale for a specific factor
or factors after the GCD data were
submitted. Requiring the rationale as
part of the submission process would
help ensure timely and accurate
payments to the LEAs in the State.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 222.62 How are local educational
agencies determined eligible under
section 8003(b)(2)?
Statute: Section 8003(b)(2) of the Act
contains the requirements for eligibility
and payment for heavily impacted
districts.
Current Regulations: The current
regulation does not address how an
applicant may apply for heavily
impacted funding under section
8003(b)(2) on the Impact Aid
application.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed
regulation would require that an LEA
that wishes to be considered for a
heavily impacted payment under
section 8003(b)(2) submit with its initial
application the information needed to
establish eligibility.
Reasons: The majority of applicants
that request assistance under section
8003(b)(2) do not meet the eligibility
requirements for these payments, nor
have they investigated the eligibility
requirements and learned whether they
may qualify. Requiring the LEAs to
submit the supporting documentation
that indicates potential eligibility would
facilitate faster determinations of
eligibility and payment for heavily
impacted districts. This proposed
regulatory change would be
complemented by a change to the
application forms to require submission
of a brief document certified by the SEA
to trigger a Department review for
section 8003(b)(2) eligibility.
§ 222.91 What requirements must a
local educational agency meet to
receive a payment under section 8003
of the Act for children residing on
Indian lands?
Statute: Section 8004 of the Act
requires that an LEA claiming children
who reside on Indian lands must
establish IPPs. As an alternative, the
LEA may obtain a waiver of this
requirement from each tribe indicating
that the tribe is satisfied with the
educational services the LEA is
providing to the children of the tribe.
Current Regulations: The current
regulation requires that an LEA claiming
children residing on Indian lands
submit with its application its IPPs and
a signed assurance attesting that the
LEA developed its IPPs in consultation
with the parents of Indian children and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
tribal officials. The current regulation
provides that in the alternative, an LEA
can submit documentation that the LEA
has received a waiver that complies
with section 8004(c) of the Act.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed
regulation would require an assurance
that the LEA has provided a written
response to the comments,
recommendations, and concerns
expressed by the parents of children
who reside on Indian lands and tribal
officials during the IPP consultation
process. In addition, the proposed
regulation would require that an IPP
waiver submitted with an application
include a written statement from an
appropriate tribal official stating that the
tribe has received a copy and
understands the requirements of
§§ 222.91 and 222.94 that are being
waived and that it is satisfied with the
LEA’s educational services provided to
the tribe’s students. An LEA would be
required to submit its waiver at the time
it submits its application.
Reasons: The Department’s tribal
consultations yielded many concerns
from the Indian community that LEAs
are not engaging in meaningful
consultation with the tribes and
families, or providing meaningful
opportunities for engagement and
communication. One of the concerns
most frequently voiced was that LEAs
have not considered the tribes or
parents’ comments, concerns or
recommendations when creating the
educational program or making
decisions about school-sponsored
activities.
The Department has taken these
concerns into account and proposes to
add to the Impact Aid section 8003
application package an assurance that
the LEA has provided written responses
to comments, concerns, or
recommendations received through the
IPP consultation process. This assurance
does not mean that an LEA must adopt
any specific recommendations; rather it
will require the LEAs to explain in
writing to the parents of Indian children
and tribal officials why the LEA is not
adopting the recommendations, or how
it will implement or take into
consideration those recommendations
or concerns.
With regard to a waiver of IPPs, the
proposed rules would clarify that a
waiver must be voluntary and must
reflect an understanding on the part of
the tribal official of the rights being
waived. The statutory option of a waiver
was intended to be used only when a
tribe is truly satisfied with an LEA’s
program and services, and not as a way
for an LEA to avoid the IPP process. The
proposed regulation would require that
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81483
a waiver be submitted with the
application and not later; in the past
when the Department has reviewed
IPPs, some LEAs have submitted a
waiver as an application amendment in
order to avoid amending the IPPs, under
circumstances that call into question
whether the waiver has been knowing
and voluntary on the part of the tribe.
Based on the discussions during the
consultation process, the Department is
also considering administrative options,
such as providing additional technical
assistance to better support and assist
LEAs, parents, and tribal officials as
they negotiate the IPP consultation
process.
§ 222.94 What provisions must be
included in a local educational
agency’s Indian policies and
procedures?
Statute: Section 8004 of the Act states
that an LEA claiming children residing
on Indian lands must establish and
maintain a set of IPPs in order to receive
funds under section 8003 of the Act.
The IPPs are intended to ensure: That
Indian children participate on an equal
basis in the educational program and
activities sponsored by the LEA; that
parents of Indian children and tribal
leaders are given the opportunity to
present their views on programs and
activities and make recommendations;
that the LEA consults with parents of
Indian children and tribal leaders in the
planning and development of the
educational program and activities; and
that the LEA disseminates evaluations,
reports and program plans to the parents
of Indian children and the tribes.
Current Regulations: The current
regulation identifies eight specific
procedures than an LEA must describe
in its IPPs. The IPPs must describe how
the LEA: (1) Gives tribal officials and
parents of Indian children the
opportunity to comment on whether or
not Indian children participate on an
equal basis with non-Indian children in
the LEA’s educational program and
school sponsored activities; (2) assesses
whether or not Indian children
participate on an equal basis; (3)
modifies, if necessary, its education
program to ensure equal participation
for Indian children; (4) disseminates
relevant documentation related to the
education programs to parents of Indian
children and tribes with sufficient time
to allow the tribes and parents of Indian
children an opportunity to review the
documentation and make informed
recommendations on the needs of the
Indian children; (5) gathers information
concerning Indian views in general and
related to the frequency, location, and
time of meetings; (6) notifies Indian
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
81484
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
parents and tribes of the time and
location of meetings; (7) consults and
involves tribal officials and parents of
Indian children in the planning and
development phase of the LEA’s
education programs and activities; and
(8) modifies the IPPs, if necessary.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed
regulation would reorganize the
information from §§ 222.94 and
222.95(e)–(g); it would also add a
requirement that the LEA respond in
writing, at least annually, to the
comments and recommendations of the
tribes or parents of Indian children and
disseminate these responses to the tribes
and parents prior to the submission of
the IPPs to the Department. The
regulation would also require the LEA
to provide a copy of the IPPs to the tribe
annually. Additionally, the proposed
regulation would move paragraphs (e)–
(g) of section § 222.95 to the revised
§ 222.94. Under those relocated
provisions, proposed § 222.94(c)(3)
would change the number of days that
an LEA has to amend its IPPs, if it
determines that they are not in
compliance, from 60 days to 90 days.
Reasons: The proposed provisions of
§§ 222.94 and 222.95(e)–(g) are
reorganized for clarity and order.
Proposed § 222.94 would emphasize
that the LEA must consult with, and
actively solicit involvement from, the
local tribes and parents of Indian
children in the development of both the
IPPs and the educational program and
activities.
Proposed § 222.94(b)(5) would add a
requirement that the LEA provide
written responses at least annually to
comments and recommendations
received through the IPP consultation
process. This proposal stems from one
of the most frequent concerns raised
during the Indian consultation; that
many LEAs have not considered the
tribes or parents’ comments, concerns or
recommendations when creating the
educational program or making
decisions about school-sponsored
activities. This provision would not
require that an LEA adopt any specific
recommendations; rather it would
require the LEA to explain in writing to
the parents of Indian children and tribal
officials why the LEA is not adopting
the recommendations, or how it will
implement or take into consideration
those recommendations or concerns.
The LEA’s response would demonstrate
how the feedback has been thoughtfully
considered in the development of the
educational program, and would be
reflected in the IPPs. Optimally, the
outcome of the IPP consultation process
would be a document that demonstrates
to the tribe that the LEA has heard and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
acknowledged the feedback from the
parents of Indian children and tribes.
In addition, we learned during
consultations that tribes do not always
have access to a copy of the IPPs; thus
the revisions would require the LEA to
provide a copy of the IPPs to the tribe
annually.
Because LEAs are often required by
State or local law to have the school
board (or equivalent) certify any
changes to the IPPs, extending the time
that an LEA has to revise its IPPs from
60 to 90 days would allow time for both
the revision and any necessary
procedural steps. The provisions in
proposed paragraph (c) were moved
from current § 222.95(e)–(g) to keep the
provisions related to the creation,
content, and revision of IPPs under one
regulatory section.
§ 222.95 How are Indian policies and
procedures reviewed to ensure
compliance with the requirements in
section 8004(a) of the Act?
Statute: Section 8004(e) of the Act
provides for a complaint procedure for
tribes with regard to IPPs. Under certain
circumstances following a hearing and a
determination by the Secretary, if the
Department finds that the LEA is still in
noncompliance with the provisions of
section 8004, the Department must
withhold Impact Aid payments to the
LEA until the LEA undertakes the
required remedy, unless the
withholding would substantially disrupt
the LEA’s education programs.
Current Regulations: The current
regulation describes how the
Department reviews and evaluates IPPs
to ensure compliance with §§ 222.91
and 222.94. It provides that the
Secretary will review IPPs periodically
to ensure compliance. If an LEA is not
in compliance, the Secretary will notify
the LEA in writing of the deficiencies.
Current § 222.95(d) states that the
Department may withhold all payments
if the LEA fails to bring its IPPs into
compliance within 60 days of receipt of
the Department’s formal notification.
Proposed Regulations: Proposed
§ 222.95(c) would change the number of
days that an LEA has to remedy issues
of noncompliance from 60 days to 90
days. The proposed regulation would
also change the provision on
withholding all section 8003 payments
to the option to withhold all or part of
the section 8003 payments. Finally, the
proposed regulations would move
paragraphs (e)–(g) of current § 222.95
into proposed § 222.94.
Reasons: LEAs often need to have the
school board (or equivalent body) certify
any changes to the IPPs. Extending the
time that an LEA has to revise its IPPs
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
following Department notification from
60 to 90 days would allow time for both
the revision and school board
certification.
Under the current withholding
provisions, if an LEA does not correct
deficiencies in its IPPs within 60 days,
the Department’s only sanction is to
withhold all section 8003 payments,
unless the withholding would
substantially disrupt the LEA’s
education programs. As many LEAs rely
heavily on Impact Aid funds,
withholding all section 8003 funds
would prevent some LEAs from being
able to provide an adequate educational
program to the students they serve. The
Secretary’s intent in proposing to amend
this regulation is to adopt clear, fair, and
flexible withholding procedures in the
event a withholding action is required.
We learned through the tribal
consultation that tribes favor incentives
to encourage LEAs to bring deficient
IPPs into compliance with the law in a
way that does not interrupt the
educational services provided to their
children. The proposed withholding
procedure balances the need for
compliance with the interests of
ensuring the LEA has the resources
needed to provide adequate educational
services to the children they serve.
Regarding the comments we heard
requesting a more informal process for
resolving disputes about IPPs, we fully
encourage school districts and tribes to
use alternative methods of dispute
resolution, such as mediation or
arbitration. This could obviate the need
for a formal complaint to the
Department, and nothing in the
proposed or current regulations would
prevent such a step. In addition, a party,
once it has initiated a formal complaint,
may request the Department to stay the
proceedings to pursue mediation, and
the Department would do so if both
parties agree. In addition, the Impact
Aid Program is willing to provide
technical assistance to both parties to
facilitate a common understanding
before a formal complaint is launched.
Subpart K—Determinations Under
Section 8009 of the Act
Section 222.161 How is State aid
treated under Section 8009 of the Act?
Statute: Section 8009(d)(2) of the Act
prohibits States from taking Impact Aid
into consideration as local revenues
when making State aid payments before
the Secretary certifies that the State’s
program of aid is equalized.
Current Regulations: The current
regulation in § 222.161(a)(5) repeats the
statutory prohibition against a State
taking Impact Aid into consideration
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
before being certified. The current
regulation does not specifically address
the data needed from a State that was
not previously certified but that is now
requesting certification under section
8009 of the Act.
Proposed Regulations: Under the
proposed regulations, if the Secretary
has not issued a certification before the
beginning of the State’s fiscal year, the
State may request permission from the
Secretary to make estimated State aid
payments that take Impact Aid into
account as local revenue. Before
granting permission, the Secretary
would consider whether the Secretary
certified the State as equalized for the
prior fiscal year, and whether the State
revised its State aid program since the
date of the prior year’s certification.
Also, the State must assure that if the
State does not meet the disparity
standard, the State will reimburse each
LEA the amount deducted, within 60
days of the Department’s determination.
The proposed regulations would also
clarify that if the Secretary has not
previously certified a State’s program of
State aid and the State wishes to apply
for certification, the State would submit
projected data showing that it would
meet the disparity standard if it were
authorized to deduct Impact Aid under
section 8009 of the Act.
Reasons: The Department interprets
section 8009 of the Act to prohibit
States from making final, as opposed to
estimated, State aid payments that
consider eligible Impact Aid funds as
local effort without the Secretary’s
certification. In instances where a State
or LEA requests a pre-determination
hearing under § 222.164(b)(5) and the
issues presented are complex, the
Secretary may not be able to make a
final determination as to whether the
State is equalized before the beginning
of the State’s fiscal year. In these
instances, States should have the option
of including estimated eligible Impact
Aid revenues as local effort when
making estimated State aid payments,
rather than removing these Impact Aid
revenues from consideration. Because
certifications apply to an entire State
fiscal year, if a State were required to
remove Impact Aid revenues from
estimated State aid payments and the
Secretary later determines that the State
is equalized, the State would need to
adjust all State aid payments and Impact
Aid recipients would have to return
funds to the State. This could seriously
destabilize an LEA’s budget. On the
other hand, if the State begins by taking
eligible Impact Aid payments into
account in its estimated State aid
payments, as these regulations propose,
and the Secretary does not certify the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
State as equalized, the State would have
to increase each Impact Aid LEA’s State
aid within 60 days. The effect on the
LEA’s budget would then be positive,
rather than negative. Even though the
State would have to come up with
additional funds, States are not required
to request this advanced permission to
make estimated payments that consider
Impact Aid.
Definition of Current Expenditures
Statute: Section 8013(4) of the Act
defines ‘‘current expenditures.’’
Current Regulations: The current
regulation in paragraph (c) repeats the
definition of ‘‘current expenditures’’ in
the Act, and lists specific exclusions
from that definition for the purposes of
section 8009, such as expenditures from
revenues designated for special cost
differentials.
Proposed Regulations: The
Department proposes that the regulatory
definition for ‘‘current expenditures’’
refer to, rather than repeat, the
definition in section 8013(4) of the Act,
and then list the additional exclusion
for purposes of section 8009 of the Act.
We would remove the exclusions in
current subparagraphs (1) through (5) as
part of the reorganized definition.
Reasons: Referring applicants to the
statutory definition of ‘‘current
expenditures’’ will reduce redundancy.
Subparagraphs (1) and (2) are contained
in the statutory definition and thus are
not needed. The intent of paragraphs (3)
and (4), regarding special cost
differentials, will be more clearly
addressed by proposed § 222.162, which
would define the four acceptable
methods of calculating cost differentials
for purposes of the disparity test. The
substance of the current subparagraph
(5) is combined into the text of the
proposed regulation for clarity.
Section 222.162 What disparity
standard must a State meet in order to
be certified and how are disparities in
current expenditures or revenues per
pupil measured?
Statute: Section 8009(b)(2)(B)(ii) of
the Act states that when certifying a
State as equalized, the Secretary may
take into account the extent to which a
State aid program reflects additional
costs of providing education in areas
with special geographical factors or for
students with particular needs, such as
students with disabilities.
Current Regulations: The current
regulations explain the data a State
should submit to the Secretary as
evidence that its State aid program is
equalized. The regulations identify the
types of ‘‘special cost differentials’’ a
State may account for when calculating
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81485
per-pupil expenditures or revenues for
each LEA, but do not explain
specifically how these differentials are
to be considered.
Proposed Regulations: The
Department proposes that a State may
account for special cost differentials in
one of four ways: The inclusion method
on a revenue basis, the inclusion
method on an expenditure basis, the
exclusion method on a revenue basis, or
the exclusion method on an expenditure
basis. Using the inclusion method, a
State would divide an LEA’s revenue or
total current expenditures by a pupil
count that includes weights associated
with special cost differentials. Using the
exclusion method, a State would take an
LEA’s total revenues or current
expenditures, subtract those revenues or
expenditures associated with special
cost differentials, and divide by the
LEA’s unweighted pupil count.
Reasons: The current regulations are
not clear regarding how States should
treat special cost differentials in
submitting data under the disparity test.
The Department’s longstanding
interpretation of section 8009 of the Act
and § 222.162 of the regulations is that
there are four methods available,
logically and mathematically, for
treating those cost differentials.
Explicitly defining the four options for
taking special cost differentials into
account would clarify the Department’s
long-standing interpretation of the
statute, and avoid potential controversy
over data submission under section
8009.
Section 222.164 What procedures
does the Secretary follow in making a
determination under section 8009?
Statute: Section 8009(c)(2) of the Act
states that before making a
determination under section 8009, the
Secretary shall afford the State, and
LEAs in the State, an opportunity to
present their views.
Current Regulations: Under the
current regulations, the party initiating
the proceeding under section 8009 shall
notify the State and all LEAs in the State
of their right to present views before the
Secretary makes a determination.
Proposed Regulations: The
Department proposes that the Secretary,
rather than a State or LEA initiating a
proceeding, notify the State and all
LEAs in the State of their right to
present their views before the Secretary
makes a determination under section
8009.
Reasons: It is more practical for the
Secretary to send the notification that
the State and all LEAs in the State may
present views, because the Department
coordinates the predetermination
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
81486
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
hearing, and the request for the informal
hearing needs to be made to the
Department. In current practice, the
Department notifies all LEAs in the
State when the State submits written
notice of its intention to consider
Impact Aid payments in providing State
aid to LEAs, and at that time gives
instructions for requesting a
predetermination hearing.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the
Secretary must determine whether this
regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and,
therefore, subject to the requirements of
the Executive order and subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866 defines a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as an action likely to
result in a rule that may—
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more, or
adversely affect a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities in a material way (also
referred to as an ‘‘economically
significant’’ rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impacts of entitlement grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
stated in the Executive order.
This proposed regulatory action is not
a significant regulatory action subject to
review by OMB under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866.
We have also reviewed these
regulations under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and
explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing
regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866. To the extent
permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency—
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only
upon a reasoned determination that
their benefits justify their costs
(recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives and
taking into account—among other things
and to the extent practicable—the costs
of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, select those
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than the
behavior or manner of compliance a
regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available
alternatives to direct regulation,
including economic incentives—such as
user fees or marketable permits—to
encourage the desired behavior, or
provide information that enables the
public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires
an agency ‘‘to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated
present and future benefits and costs as
accurately as possible.’’ The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ‘‘identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes.’’
We are issuing these proposed
regulations only on a reasoned
determination that their benefits would
justify their costs. In choosing among
alternative regulatory approaches, we
selected those approaches that would
maximize net benefits. Based on the
analysis that follows, the Department
believes that these proposed regulations
are consistent with the principles in
Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this
regulatory action would not unduly
interfere with State, local, and tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive
orders, the Department has assessed the
potential costs and benefits, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this
regulatory action. The potential costs
associated with this regulatory action
are those resulting from statutory
requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for
administering the Department’s
programs and activities. Upon review of
the costs to the LEA, we have
determined there is minimal financial or
resource burden associated with these
changes, and that the net impact of the
changes would be a reduction in burden
hours. Certain affected LEAs would
need to respond in writing to comments
from tribes and parents of Indian
students, but this time burden would be
balanced by other proposed regulatory
changes that reduce the burden, which
result in a net decrease of both burden
hours and cost associated with these
regulations.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 and the
Presidential memorandum ‘‘Plain
Language in Government Writing’’
require each agency to write regulations
that are easy to understand.
The Secretary invites comments on
how to make these proposed regulations
easier to understand, including answers
to questions such as the following:
• Are the requirements in the
proposed regulations clearly stated?
• Do the proposed regulations contain
technical terms or other wording that
interferes with their clarity?
• Does the format of the proposed
regulations (grouping and order of
sections, use of headings, paragraphing,
etc.) aid or reduce their clarity?
• Would the proposed regulations be
easier to understand if we divided them
into more (but shorter) sections? (A
‘‘section’’ is preceded by the symbol
‘‘§ ’’ and a numbered heading; for
example, § 222.2 What definitions
apply to this part?)
• Could the description of the
proposed regulations in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this preamble be more helpful in
making the proposed regulations easier
to understand? If so, how?
• What else could we do to make the
proposed regulations easier to
understand? To send any comments that
concern how the Department could
make these proposed regulations easier
to understand, see the instructions in
the ADDRESSES section.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that these
proposed regulations would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The U.S. Small Business
Administration Size Standards define
institutions as ‘‘small entities’’ if they
are for-profit or nonprofit institutions
with total annual revenue below
$5,000,000 or if they are institutions
controlled by governmental entities
with populations below 50,000. These
proposed regulations would affect LEAs
that meet this definition; therefore,
these proposed regulations would affect
small entities, but they would not have
a significant economic impact on these
entities.
The proposed regulations would
benefit both small and large institutions,
including those that qualify as small
entities, by removing the paperwork
burden for reporting average daily
attendance, reducing the burden for
collection of data for the LEAs reporting
children residing on Indian lands and
low-rent housing. Multiple children can
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
be verified on one form instead of one
form per child. Thus, small entities
would experience regulatory relief and
a positive economic impact as a result
of these proposed regulations.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
As part of its continuing effort to
reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, the Department provides the
general public and Federal agencies
with an opportunity to comment on
proposed and continuing collections of
information in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps
ensure that: The public understands the
Department’s collection instructions,
respondents can provide the requested
data in the desired format, reporting
burden (time and financial resources) is
minimized, collection instruments are
clearly understood, and the Department
can properly assess the impact of
collection requirements on respondents.
Sections 222.35, 222.37, 222.40,
222.62, and 222.91 contain information
collection requirements. Under the PRA
the Department has submitted a copy of
these sections to OMB for its review.
A Federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor a collection of information
unless OMB approves the collection
under the PRA and the corresponding
information collection instrument
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, no person is required
to comply with, or is subject to penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection
of information if the collection
instrument does not display a currently
valid OMB control number.
In the final regulations we will
display the control number assigned by
OMB to any information collection
requirement proposed in this NPRM and
adopted in the final regulations.
The Department currently collects
information from LEA applicants for the
Impact Aid program using a programspecific grant application package (OMB
Control Number 1810–0687). The
application package, and some
information grantees are required to
submit, would change as a result of the
proposed regulations.
We estimate the total burden for the
collection of information through the
application package to be 104,720
hours. Based on past experience with
this program, we estimate that a total of
1,264 applications would be received
annually for the grant program. We
estimate that it would take each
applicant 82.8 hours to complete the
application package, including time for
reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection
of information. The proposed changes to
the regulations would change the
burden hours for this collection by
¥35,959.
Collection of Information
Section 222.35
The proposed regulations would
require that LEAs claiming children
who reside on Indian lands, and
children who reside in low-rent
housing, use a source check document
to obtain the data required to determine
the children’s eligibility. The current
burden hour estimation includes
500,000 parent respondents for the
parent pupil survey form estimating 15
minutes per form for a total burden
hours of 125,000 burden hours. The new
provision would reduce the total
number of parent respondents to
355,000 because the 145,000 children
residing on Indian lands or low rent
housing will no longer be surveyed
using the parent pupil survey form. The
burden hours for this category would
reduce to 88,750 total burden hours.
This is a reduction of 36,250 burden
hours.
The 145,000 children are distributed
across approximately 500 LEAs. The
previous burden hour calculation
included 500 LEAs at an average of 3
hours for source checks per LEA,
resulting in 1,500 total burden hours.
Under the proposed regulation, the
number of LEAs would increase to 1,000
LEAs increasing the burden hours to
3,000 for source checks, an increase of
1,500 burden hours. The net change in
burden hours between parent pupil
survey forms and source checks is a
decrease of ¥34,750 burden hours.
The program has also reduced the
average number of hours per LEA to
submit its application from 10 hours to
9 hours due to enhancements in the eApplication reporting system. This
adjustment decreases the burden hours
by ¥1,264, which results in a total
decrease in this section of ¥36,014
burden hours.
Section 222.37
Under existing regulations, the
burden estimation of hours is 900 LEAs
taking 20 minutes each to report ADA
for a total of 300 hours total burden.
Since the last estimation of burden
hours, the number of LEAs that are
required to submit this data has reduced
and will reduce again to zero under the
proposed regulations. An LEA may
exercise the option to report ADA in
order to try and increase its attendance
rate above the State average. We
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81487
estimate that approximately 100 LEAs
may use this option and the amount of
time would be 5 minutes to report the
data as it is readily available and
accessible to the LEA. The entire
estimated hours for all applicants would
be an insignificant 8.3 total hours for
this component.
Section 222.40
Proposed § 222.40 would require
SEAs that opt to use special additional
factors for the selection of GCDs to
provide a rationale demonstrating how
the special factors selected impact the
cost of education.
In the past 10 years (2006–2016) there
are 14 SEAs that have used the GCD
provision. In those 10 years, only one
SEA has used the special additional
factors provision. The SEA already
submits the data, they are simply now
providing a very brief narrative
justification. At a maximum, this should
only take 20 minutes to complete as the
majority of the work is already
accounted for in the burden hour
calculation. As a result, there is
essentially no increase for this
provision.
Section 222.62
The burden hours associated with this
activity have already been factored into
the active data collection total burden
hours; there is no increase to the burden
hour calculation.
Section 222.94
The proposed regulatory provision
would require LEAs claiming children
residing on Indian lands to respond in
writing to comments, recommendations,
and concerns from the parents of Indian
children and tribal officials. There is an
associated increase with this
requirement for the LEA. There are
approximately 800 LEAs that are
required to comply with this new
requirement. We estimate 1.3 hours for
the completion of this requirement,
which would result in an increase of
1,040 total burden hours.
Burden Hour Estimates for the Impact
Aid Section 8003 Information
Collection Package
The Impact Aid Program is extending
the existing and approved 1810–0687,
and renewing its section 8003
application package with this notice.
The following charts identify the
changes from the current information
collection with the proposed
substantive changes to this information
collection. Some of the changes in
burden hours are a result of the
proposed regulations, while others are
the result of more accurate numbers of
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
81488
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
impacted LEAs and to account for
system enhancements that make
reporting easier. The activities
associated directly with the changes
proposed in this notice have been
denoted with an asterisk. Table 1
provides a summary of the total burden
hours associated with completing an
Impact Aid application. Table 2 breaks
down the hours associated with the
completion of tables 1–5 of the Impact
Aid application for reporting an
applicant’s federally-connected
children. All applicants must complete
at least one of these tables to be eligible
to receive funding. Table 3 breaks down
the burden hours associated with
supplemental information that some or
all Impact Aid applicants must submit
with their applications. Table 4 shows
the dollar change associated with the
changes in the burden hours. For more
complete information on burden hours
and the justifications, please refer to the
Information Collection Request (ICR).
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF BURDEN HOURS TO SUBMIT A COMPLETE IMPACT AID APPLICATION PACKAGE
Total annual
burden hours
under current
regulations
By regulatory section or subsection
Estimated total
annual burden
hours under
the proposed
regulations
34 CFR 222.35, 34 CFR 222.50–52, Tables 1–5 ...............................................................................................
34 CFR 222.37, Table 6 ......................................................................................................................................
34 CFR 222.53, Table 7 ......................................................................................................................................
34 CFR 222.141–143, Table 8 ............................................................................................................................
Reporting Construction Expenditures ..................................................................................................................
Housing Official Certification Form ......................................................................................................................
Indian Policies and Procedures (IPPs) ................................................................................................................
IPP Responses. *
139,140
1,264
217
5
40
13
0
0
103,126
100
217
5
40
5
187
1,040
Total ..............................................................................................................................................................
Number of LEAs ..................................................................................................................................................
Average Hours Per LEA (total divided by number of LEAs) ...............................................................................
140,679
1,265
111.2
104,720
1,264
82.8
* Denotes changes directly associated with the proposed regulatory changes.
TABLE 2—REPORTING NUMBERS OF FEDERALLY-CONNECTED CHILDREN ON TABLES 1–5 OF THE IMPACT AID APPLICATION
Current est.
number
Task
Proposed est.
number
Average hours
0.25
Total hours
Parent-pupil surveys * ...
500,000
355,000
88,750
Source check with Federal official to document children living
on Federal property
(LEAs). *
Collecting and organizing data to report
on Tables 1–5 in the
Application (LEAs).
500
1000
3
3,000
1,265
1,264
9
11,376
Total Current .........
........................
........................
..........................
103,126
Total Previous .......
Change .........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
..........................
..........................
Explanation
Assumes 355,000 federally-connected children
identified through a survey form completed by
a parent. The number is reduced due to new
regulations requiring source check forms for
children residing on Indian lands or children
residing on eligible low rent housing.
Assumes 3 hours verify information on a source
check.
139,140
¥36,014
Assumes time to complete and organize survey/source check data on federally-connected
children averages nine hours.
* Denotes changes directly associated with the proposed regulatory changes.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 3—ADDITIONAL REPORTING TASKS AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ON TABLES 6–10 OF THE IMPACT AID
APPLICATION
Current est.
number
Task
Reporting enrollment
and attendance data
on Table 6 (LEAs). *
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Proposed est.
number
1,264
Jkt 238001
Average hours
100
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Total hours
1
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
100
Explanation
The proposed regulations would reduce the
number even further to approximately 100
LEAs who will have a higher attendance rate
than the State average.
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
81489
TABLE 3—ADDITIONAL REPORTING TASKS AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ON TABLES 6–10 OF THE IMPACT AID
APPLICATION—Continued
Current est.
number
Task
Proposed est.
number
Average hours
.25
Collecting and reporting
expenditure data for
federally-connected
children with disabilities on Table 7
(LEAs).
Reporting children educated in federallyowned school buildings on Table 8
(LEAs).
Reporting expenditures
of Section 8007 funds
on Table 10 (LEAs).
Indian Policies and Procedures (IPPs).
IPP Response * .............
869
868
5
5
159
159
625
Contact Form for Housing Undergoing Renovation or Rebuilding.
Housing Official Certification Form.
Total hours
Explanation
217
This assumes that an average of 868 LEAs received a payment for children with disabilities
in the previous year and is required by law to
report expenditures for children with disabilities for the prior year.
5
Assumes LEAs maintain data on children
housed in the small number of schools
owned by ED but operated by LEAs.
0.25
40
625
0.3
187
0
800
1.3
1,040
10
10
Assumes that the LEAs eligible to receive these
funds have ready access to financial reports
to retrieve and report these data.
The LEA does not have to collect any new information to meet this requirement.
This assumes some LEAs may have to respond
to more than one tribe.
The time associated is too small to calculate
(<5 minutes per applicant).
10
10
.50
5
Total Current .........
........................
........................
..........................
1,594
Total Previous .......
Change .........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
..........................
..........................
1,529
65
1
0
0
Amount of time for the housing official to estimate the number of school-age children that
would have resided in the housing had it not
been unavailable due to renovation or rebuilding.
* Denotes changes directly associated with the proposed regulatory changes.
TABLE 4—ESTIMATION OF ANNUALIZED COST TO APPLICANTS
Hours per
response
Respondent
Rate
($/hour)
Number of
respondents
Cost
Parent Respondents * ....................................................................................
LEA Respondents ..........................................................................................
.25
9
10
15
355,000
1,264
$887,500
170,640
Total Cost ...............................................................................................
Prior Cost Estimate ........................................................................................
Cost Change ..................................................................................................
..........................
..........................
..........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
1,058,140
1,443,992
¥385,852
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
* Denotes changes directly associated with the proposed regulatory changes.
We have prepared an ICR for these
information collection requirements. If
you want to review and comment on the
ICR, please follow these instructions:
In preparing your comments you may
want to review the ICR, including the
supporting materials, in
www.regulations.gov by using the
Docket ID number specified in this
notice. This proposed collection is
identified as proposed collection 1810–
0687.
We consider your comments on this
proposed collection of information in—
• Deciding whether the proposed
collection is necessary for the proper
performance of our functions, including
whether the information will have
practical use;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
• Evaluating the accuracy of our
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection, including the validity of our
methodology and assumptions;
• Enhancing the quality, usefulness,
and clarity of the information we
collect; and
• Minimizing the burden on those
who must respond. This includes
exploring the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques.
Between 30 and 60 days after
publication of this document in the
Federal Register, OMB is required to
make a decision concerning the
collection of information contained in
these proposed regulations. Therefore,
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to ensure that OMB gives your
comments full consideration, it is
important that OMB receives your
comments on this ICR by January 29,
2016. This does not affect the deadline
for your comments to us on the
proposed regulations.
When commenting on the ICR for
these proposed regulations, please
specify the Docket ID number and
indicate ‘‘Information Collection
Comments’’ on the top of your
comments.
Written requests for information or
comments submitted by postal mail or
delivery related to the information
collection requirements should be
addressed to the Director of the
Information Collection Clearance
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
81490
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Division, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW., Mailstop L–
OM–2E319LBJ, Room 2E115,
Washington, DC 20202–4537.
Intergovernmental Review
This program is not subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or compact disc) on
request to the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document:
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 via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you
can 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). To use PDF you must
have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at: www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department. (Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance Number 84.041
Impact Aid)
List of Subjects in 34 CFR Part 222
Administrative practice and
procedure, Education of individuals
with disabilities, Elementary and
secondary education, Federally affected
areas, Grant programs—education,
Indians—education, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, School
construction.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Dated: December 22, 2015.
Ann Whalen,
Delegated the authority to perform the
functions and duties of Assistant Secretary
for Elementary and Secondary Education.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Assistant Secretary for
Elementary and Secondary Education
proposes to amend part 222 of title 34
of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
2. Section 222.2 is amended in
paragraph (c) by:
■ A. Revising paragraph (3)(iv) under
the definition of ‘‘Membership’’, and
adding paragraph (3)(v).
■ B. Revising the definition of ‘‘Parent
employed on Federal property’’.
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
■
§ 222.2
What definitions apply to this part?
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
Membership means the following:
(3) * * *
(iv) Attend the schools of the
applicant LEA under a tuition
arrangement with another LEA that is
responsible for providing them a free
public education; or
(v) Reside in a State other than the
State in which the LEA is located,
unless the student is covered by the
provisions of—
(A) Section 8010(c) of the Act; or
(B) A formal State tuition or
enrollment agreement.
*
*
*
*
*
Parent employed on Federal property.
(1) The term means:
(i) An employee of the Federal
Government who reports to work on, or
whose place of work is located on,
Federal property, including a federal
employee who reports to an alternative
duty station on the survey date, but
whose regular duty station is on Federal
property.
(ii) A person not employed by the
Federal Government but who spends
more than 50 percent of his or her
working time on Federal property
(whether as an employee or selfemployed) when engaged in farming,
grazing, lumbering, mining, or other
operations that are authorized by the
Federal Government, through a lease or
other arrangement, to be carried out
entirely or partly on Federal property.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph
(1)(ii) of this definition, the term does
not include a person who is not
employed by the Federal government
and reports to work at a location not on
Federal property, even though the
individual provides services to
operations or activities authorized to be
carried out on Federal property.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7703)
*
*
§ 222.3
*
*
*
[Amended]
3. Section 222.3 is amended by
removing the phrase ‘‘September 30’’ in
paragraph (b)(2) introductory text and
adding in its place ‘‘June 30’’.
■ 4. Section 222.5 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(1) and
(2) to read as follows:
■
PART 222—IMPACT AID PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for part 222
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7701–7714, unless
otherwise noted.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 222.5 When may a local educational
agency amend its application?
(a) * * *
(2) By June 30 of the Federal fiscal
year preceding the fiscal year for which
the LEA seeks assistance.
(b) * * *
(1) Those data were not available at
the time the LEA filed its application
and are acceptable to the Secretary; and
(2) The LEA submits a written request
to the Secretary with a copy to its SEA
no later than June 30 of the Federal
fiscal year preceding the fiscal year for
which the LEA seeks assistance.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Section 222.22 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:
§ 222.22 How does the Secretary treat
compensation from Federal activities for
purposes of determining eligibility and
payments?
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) The LEA received revenue during
the preceding fiscal year, including
payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTS or
PILTs) and other payments received
from any other Federal Department or
agency, generated directly from the
eligible Federal property or activities in
or on that property; and
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Section 222.23 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 222.23 How are consolidated LEAs
treated for the purposes of eligibility and
payment under section 8002?
(a) Eligibility. An LEA formed by the
consolidation of one or more LEAs is
eligible for section 8002 funds,
notwithstanding section 222.21(a)(1),
if—
(1) The consolidation occurred prior
to fiscal year 1995 or after fiscal year
2005; and
(2) At least one of the former LEAs
included in the consolidation:
(i) Was eligible for section 8002 funds
in the fiscal year prior to the
consolidation; and
(ii) Currently contains Federal
property that meets the requirements of
222.21(a) within the boundaries of the
former LEA or LEAs.
(b) Documentation required. In the
first year of application following the
consolidation, an LEA that meets the
requirements of paragraph (a) must
submit evidence that it meets the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) and
(a)(2)(ii).
(c) Basis for foundation payment. (1)
The foundation payment for a
consolidated district is based on the
total section 8002 payment for the last
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
fiscal year for which the former LEA
received payment. When more than one
former LEA qualifies under paragraph
(a)(2), the payments for the last fiscal
year for which the former LEAs received
payment are added together to calculate
the foundation basis.
(2) Consolidated LEAs receive only a
foundation payment and do not receive
a payment from any remaining funds.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7702(g) and Pub. L.
113–76)
(c) The data resulting from the count
in paragraph (b) must be complete by
the application deadline.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 222.34
[Removed and Reserved]
10. Section 222.34 is removed and
reserved.
■ 11. Section 222.35 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2),
adding paragraphs (a)(3) and (4), and
revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
■
7. Section 222.24 is added to read as
follows:
§ 222.35 How does a local educational
agency count the membership of its
federally connected children?
§ 222.24 How does a local educational
agency that has multiple tax rates for real
property classifications derive a single real
property tax rate?
*
An LEA that has multiple tax rates for
real property classifications derives a
single tax rate for the purposes of
determining its Section 8002 maximum
payment by dividing the total revenues
for current expenditures it received
from local real property taxes by the
total taxable value of real property
located within the boundaries of the
LEA. These data are from the fiscal year
prior to the fiscal year in which the
applicant seeks assistance.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7702)
8. Section 222.30 is amended in the
definition of ‘‘free public education’’ by
revising paragraph (2)(ii) to read as
follows:
■
§ 222.30
What is ‘‘free public education’’?
*
*
*
*
*
(2) * * *
(ii) Federal funds, other than Impact
Aid funds and charter school startup
funds (Title V, part B, subpart I of the
Act), do not provide a substantial
portion of the educational program, in
relation to other LEAs in the State, as
determined by the Secretary.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 222.32
[Amended]
9. Section 222.32 is amended in
paragraph (b) by adding the phrase
‘‘timely and complete’’ after the first
instance of ‘‘its’’.
■ 10. Section 222.33 is amended by:
■ A. Revising the section heading.
■ B. Removing the phrase ‘‘the first’’ in
paragraph (a)(1) and adding in its place
‘‘its’’.
■ C. Adding paragraph (c).
The revision and addition reads as
follows:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
■
§ 222.33 When must an applicant make its
membership count?
*
*
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
*
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(1) The applicant shall conduct a
parent-pupil survey by providing a form
to a parent of each pupil enrolled in the
LEA to substantiate the pupil’s place of
residence and the parent’s place of
employment.
(2) A parent-pupil survey form must
include the following:
(i) Pupil enrollment information (this
information may also be obtained from
school records), including—
(A) Name of pupil;
(B) Date of birth of the pupil; and
(C) Name of public school and grade
of the pupil.
(ii) Pupil residence information,
including:
(A) The complete address of the
pupil’s residence, or other acceptable
location information for that residence,
such as a complete legal description, a
complete U.S. Geological Survey
number, or complete property tract or
parcel number; and
(B) If the pupil’s residence is on
Federal property, the name of the
Federal facility.
(3) If any of the following
circumstances apply, the parent-pupil
survey form must also include the
following:
(i) If the parent is employed on
Federal property, except for a parent
who is a member of the uniformed
services on active duty, parent
employment information, including—
(A) Name (as it appears on the
employer’s payroll record) of the parent
(mother, father, legal guardian or other
person standing in loco parentis) who is
employed on Federal property and with
whom the pupil resides; and
(B) Name of employer, name and
complete address of the Federal
property on which the parent is
employed (or other acceptable location
information, such as a complete legal
description).
(ii) If the parent is a member of the
uniformed services on active duty, the
name, rank, and branch of service of
that parent.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81491
(iii) If the parent is both an official of,
and accredited by a foreign government,
and a foreign military officer, the name,
rank, and country of service.
(iv) If the parent is a civilian
employed on a Federal vessel, the name
of the vessel, hull number, homeport,
and name of the controlling agency.
(4)(i) Every parent-pupil survey form
must include the signature of the parent
supplying the information and the date
of such signature, except as provided in
paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section.
(ii) An LEA may accept an unsigned
parent-pupil survey form, or a parentpupil survey form that is signed by a
person other than a parent, only under
unusual circumstances. In those
instances, the parent-pupil survey form
must show why the parent did not sign
the survey form, and when, how, and
from whom the residence and
employment information was obtained.
Unusual circumstances may include,
but are not limited to:
(A) A pupil who, on the survey date,
resided with a person without full legal
guardianship of the child while the
pupil’s parent or parents were deployed
for military duty. In this case, the
person with whom the child is residing
may sign the parent-pupil survey form.
(B) A pupil who, on the survey date,
was a ward of the juvenile justice
system. In this case, an administrator of
the institution where the pupil was held
on the survey date may sign the parentpupil survey form.
(C) A pupil who, on the survey date,
was an emancipated youth may sign his
or her own parent-pupil survey form.
(D) A pupil who, on the survey date,
was at least 18 years old but who was
not past the 12th grade may sign his or
her own parent-pupil survey form.
(iii) The Department does not accept
a parent pupil survey form signed by an
employee of the school district who is
not the student’s mother, father, legal
guardian or other person standing in
loco parentis.
(b) Source check. A source check is a
type of survey tool that groups children
being claimed on the Impact Aid
application by Federal property. This
form is used in lieu of the parent-pupil
survey form to substantiate a pupil’s
place of residence or parent’s place of
employment on the survey date.
(1) A source check is required to
document children residing on Indian
lands and children residing in eligible
low-rent housing.
(2) The source check must include
sufficient information to determine the
eligibility of the Federal property and
the individual children claimed on the
form.
(3) A source check may also include:
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
81492
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
(i) Certification by a parent’s
employer regarding the parent’s place of
employment;
(ii) Certification by a military or other
Federal housing official as to the
residence of each pupil claimed; or
(iii) Certification by a military
personnel official regarding the military
active duty status of the parent of each
pupil claimed as active duty uniformed
services.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 12. Section 222.37 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b) and (c) and
adding paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as
follows:
§ 222.37 How does the Secretary calculate
the average daily attendance of federally
connected children?
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(b)(1) For purposes of this section,
actual ADA means raw ADA data that
have not been weighted or adjusted to
reflect higher costs for specific types of
students for purposes of distributing
State aid for education.
(2) If an LEA provides a program of
free public summer school, attendance
data for the summer session are
included in the LEA’s ADA figure in
accordance with State law or practice.
(3) An LEA’s ADA count includes
attendance data for children who do not
attend the LEA’s schools, but for whom
it makes tuition arrangements with
other educational entities.
(4) Data are not counted for any
child—
(i) Who is not physically present at
school for the daily minimum time
period required by the State, unless the
child is—
(A) Participating via
telecommunication or correspondence
course programs that meet State
standards; or
(B) Being served by a State-approved
homebound instruction program for the
daily minimum time period appropriate
for the child; or
(ii) Attending the applicant’s schools
under a tuition arrangement with
another LEA.
(c) An LEA may calculate its average
daily attendance calculation in one of
the following ways:
(1) If an LEA is in a State that collects
actual ADA data for purposes of
distributing State aid for education, the
Secretary calculates the ADA of that
LEA’s federally connected children for
the current fiscal year payment as
follows:
(i) By dividing the ADA of all the
LEA’s children for the second preceding
fiscal year by the LEA’s total
membership on its survey date for the
second preceding fiscal year (or, in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
case of an LEA that conducted two
membership counts in the second
preceding fiscal year, by the average of
the LEA’s total membership on the two
survey dates); and
(ii) By multiplying the figure
determined in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) of
this section by the LEA’s total
membership of federally connected
children in each subcategory described
in section 8003 and claimed in the
LEA’s application for the current fiscal
year payment.
(2) An LEA may submit its total
preceding year average daily attendance
data. The Secretary uses these data to
calculate the ADA of the LEA’s federally
connected children by—
(i) Dividing the LEA’s preceding
year’s total ADA data by the preceding
year’s total membership data; and
(ii) Multiplying the figure determined
in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section by
the LEA’s total membership of federally
connected children as described in
paragraph (c)(1)(i)(B) of this section.
(3) An LEA may submit attendance
data based on sampling conducted
during the previous fiscal year.
(i) The sampling must include
attendance data for all children for at
least 30 school days.
(ii) The data must be collected during
at least three periods evenly distributed
throughout the school year.
(iii) Each collection period must
consist of at least five consecutive
school days.
(iv) The Secretary uses these data to
calculate the ADA of the LEA’s federally
connected children by—
(A) Determining the ADA of all
children in the sample;
(B) Dividing the figure obtained in
paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(A) of this section by
the LEA’s total membership for the
previous fiscal year; and
(C) Multiplying the figure determined
in paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(B) of this section
by the LEA’s total membership of
federally connected children for the
current fiscal year, as described in
paragraph (c)(1)(i)(B) of this section.
(d) An SEA may submit data to
calculate the average daily attendance
calculation for the LEAs in that State in
one of the following ways:
(1) If the SEA distributes State aid for
education based on data similar to
attendance data, the SEA may request
that the Secretary use those data to
calculate the ADA of each LEA’s
federally connected children. If the
Secretary determines that those data are,
in effect, equivalent to attendance data,
the Secretary allows use of the
requested data and determines the
method by which the ADA for all of the
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
LEA’s federally connected children will
be calculated.
(2) An SEA may submit data
necessary for the Secretary to calculate
a State average attendance ratio for all
LEAs in the State by submitting the total
ADA and total membership data for the
State for each of the last three most
recent fiscal years that ADA data were
collected. The Secretary uses these data
to calculate the ADA of the federally
connected children for each LEA in the
State by—
(i)(A) Dividing the total ADA data by
the total membership data for each of
the three fiscal years and averaging the
results; and
(B) Multiplying the average
determined in paragraph (d)(2)(i)(A) of
this section by the LEA’s total
membership of federally connected
children as described in paragraph
(c)(1)(i)(B) of this section.
(e) The Secretary may calculate a
State average attendance ratio in States
with LEAs that would benefit from such
calculation by using the methodology in
paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 13. Section 222.40 is amended in
paragraph (d)(1)(i) by adding the phrase
‘‘or density’’ after the word ‘‘sparsity’’
and by adding paragraph (d)(1)(iii).
The addition reads as follows:
§ 222.40 What procedures does a State
educational agency use for certain local
educational agencies to determine
generally comparable local educational
agencies using additional factors, for local
contribution rate purposes?
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) The SEA must submit its
rationale for selecting the additional
factors and describe how they affect the
cost of education in the LEA.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 14. Section 222.62 is amended:
■ A. By redesignating paragraphs (a)
and (b) as paragraphs (b) and (c),
respectively.
■ B. By adding a new paragraph (a).
■ C. In newly redesignated paragraph
(b), by removing the phrase ‘‘an
additional assistance payment under
section 8003(f)’’ and adding in its place
‘‘a heavily impacted payment’’.
■ D. In newly redesignated paragraph
(c), by removing the phrase ‘‘an
additional assistance payment under
section 8003(f)’’ and adding in its place
‘‘a heavily impacted payment’’.
The addition reads as follows:
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
§ 222.62 How are local educational
agencies determined eligible under section
8003(b)(2)?
(a) An applicant that wishes to be
considered to receive a heavily
impacted payment must submit the
required information indicating
eligibility under §§ 222.63 or 222.64
with the annual section 8003 Impact
Aid application.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 15. Section 222.91 is revised to read
as follows:
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7703(a), 7704)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 222.91 What requirements must a local
educational agency meet to receive a
payment under section 8003 of the Act for
children residing on Indian lands?
(a) To receive a payment under
section 8003 of the Act for children
residing on Indian lands, a local
educational agency (LEA) must—
(1) Meet the application and
eligibility requirements in section 8003
and subparts A and C of these
regulations;
(2) Except as provided in paragraph
(b), develop and implement policies and
procedures in accordance with § 222.94;
and
(3) Include in its application for
payments under section 8003—
(i) An assurance that the LEA
established these policies and
procedures in consultation with and
based on information from tribal
officials and parents of those children
residing on Indian lands who are Indian
children, except as provided in
paragraph (b) of this section;
(ii) An assurance that the LEA has
provided a written response to the
comments, concerns and
recommendations received through the
Indian policy and procedures
consultation process, except as provided
in paragraph (b) of this section; and
(iii) Either a copy of the policies and
procedures, or documentation that the
LEA has received a waiver in
accordance with the provisions of
paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) An LEA is not required to comply
with § 222.94 with respect to students
from a tribe that has provided the LEA
with a waiver that meets the
requirements of this paragraph.
(1) A waiver must contain a voluntary
written statement from an appropriate
tribal official or tribal governing body
that—
(i) The LEA need not comply with
§ 222.94 because the tribe is satisfied
with the LEA’s provision of educational
services to the tribe’s students; and
(ii) The tribe was provided a copy of
the requirements in § 222.91 and
§ 222.94, and understands the
requirements that are being waived.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Jkt 238001
(2) The LEA must submit the waiver
at the time of application.
(3) The LEA must obtain a waiver
from each tribe that has Indian children
living on Indian lands claimed by the
LEA on its application under section
8003 of the Act. If the LEA only obtains
waivers from some, but not all,
applicable tribes, the LEA must comply
with the requirements of § 222.94 with
respect to those tribes that did not agree
to waive these requirements.
16. Section 222.94 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 222.94 What are the responsibilities of
the LEA with regard to Indian policies and
procedures?
(a) An LEA that is subject to the
requirements of § 222.91(a) must consult
with and involve local tribal officials
and parents of Indian children in the
planning and development of:
(1) Its Indian policies and procedures
(IPPs), and
(2) The LEA’s general educational
program and activities.
(b) An LEA’s IPPs must include a
description of the specific procedures
for how the LEA will:
(1) Disseminate relevant applications,
evaluations, program plans and
information related to the LEA’s
education program and activities with
sufficient advance notice to allow tribes
and parents of Indian children the
opportunity to review and make
recommendations.
(2) Provide an opportunity for tribes
and parents of Indian children to
provide their views on the LEA’s
educational program and activities,
including recommendations on the
needs of their children and on how the
LEA may help those children realize the
benefits of the LEA’s education
programs and activities. As part of this
requirement, the LEA will—
(i) Notify tribes and the parents of
Indian children of the opportunity to
submit comments and
recommendations, considering the
tribe’s preference for method of
communication, and
(ii) Modify the method of and time for
soliciting Indian views, if necessary, to
ensure the maximum participation of
tribes and parents of Indian children.
(3) At least annually, assess the extent
to which Indian children participate on
an equal basis with non-Indian children
in the LEA’s education program and
activities. As part of this requirement,
the LEA will:
(i) Share relevant information related
to Indian children’s participation in the
LEA’s education program and activities
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81493
with tribes and parents of Indian
children; and
(ii) Allow tribes and parents of Indian
children the opportunity and time to
review and comment on whether Indian
children participate on an equal basis
with non-Indian children.
(4) Modify the IPPs if necessary, based
upon the results of any assessment or
input described in paragraph (b) of this
section.
(5) Respond at least annually in
writing to comments and
recommendations made by tribes or
parents of Indian children, and
disseminate the responses to the tribe
and parents of Indian children prior to
the submission of the IPPs by the LEA.
(6) Provide a copy of the IPPs
annually to the affected tribe or tribes.
(c)(1) An LEA that is subject to the
requirements of § 222.91(a) must
implement the IPPs described in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(2) Each LEA that has developed IPPs
shall review those IPPs annually to
ensure that they comply with the
provisions of this section, and are
implemented by the LEA in accordance
with this section.
(3) If an LEA determines, after input
from the tribe and parents of Indian
children, that its IPPs do not meet the
requirements of this section, the LEA
shall amend its IPPs to conform with
those requirements within 90 days of its
determination.
(4) An LEA that amends its IPPs shall,
within 30 days, send a copy of the
amended IPPs to—
(i) The Impact Aid Program Director
for approval; and
(ii) The affected tribe or tribes.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7704)
§ 222.95
[Amended]
17. Section 222.95 is amended:
A. In paragraph (c), by removing the
number ‘‘60’’ and adding in its place
‘‘90’’.
■ B. In paragraph (d), by adding the
phrase ‘‘or part of the’’ after the word
‘‘all’’.
■ C. By removing paragraphs (e), (f), and
(g).
■ 18. Section 222.161 is amended by:
■ A. Adding the phrase ‘‘Except as
provided in paragraph (a)(6),’’ to the
beginning of paragraph (a)(5) and
lowercasing the word ‘‘A’’.
■ B. Adding paragraphs (a)(6) and (b)(3).
■ C. Revising paragraph (c).
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
■
■
§ 222.161 How is State aid treated under
section 8009 of the Act?
(a) * * *
(6)(i) If the Secretary has not made a
determination 30 days before the
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
81494
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules
beginning of the State’s fiscal year, the
State may request permission from the
Secretary to make estimated or
preliminary State aid payments that
consider a portion of Impact Aid
payments as local resources in
accordance with this section.
(ii) The State must include with its
request an assurance that if the
Secretary determines that the State does
not meet the requirements of section
222.162 for that State fiscal year, the
State must pay to each affected LEA,
within 60 days of the Secretary’s
determination, the amount by which the
State reduced State aid to the LEA.
(iii) In determining whether to grant
permission, the Secretary may consider
factors including whether—
(A) The Secretary certified the State
under § 222.162 in the prior State fiscal
year; and
(B) Substantially the same State aid
program is in effect since the date of the
last certification.
(b) * * *
(3) For a State that has not previously
been certified by the Secretary under
§ 222.162, or if the last certification was
more than two years prior, the State
submits projected data showing whether
it meets the disparity standard in
§ 222.162. The projected data must
show the resulting amounts of State aid
as if the State were certified to consider
Impact Aid in making State aid
payments.
(c) Definitions. The following
definitions apply to this subpart:
Current expenditures is defined in
section 8013(4) of the Act. Additionally,
for the purposes of this section it does
not include expenditures of funds
received by the agency under sections
8002 and 8003(b) (including hold
harmless payments calculated under
section 8003(e)) that are not taken into
consideration under the State aid
program and exceed the proportion of
those funds that the State would be
allowed to take into consideration under
§ 222.162.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7709)
19. Section 222.162 is amended:
A. In paragraph (c)(2) introductory
text, by removing the phrase ‘‘on those
bases’’ in the first sentence and adding
in its place ‘‘using one of the methods
in paragraph (d)’’.
■ B. Revising paragraph (d).
The revision reads as follows:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
■
■
figures under paragraph (c) of this
section, the State accounts for special
cost differentials that meet the
requirements of paragraph (c)(2) of this
section in one of four ways:
(1) The Inclusion Method on a
Revenue Basis. The State divides total
revenues by a weighted pupil count that
includes only those weights associated
with the special cost differentials.
(2) The Inclusion Method on an
Expenditure Basis. The State divides
total current expenditures by a weighted
pupil count that includes only those
weights associated with the special cost
differentials.
(3) The Exclusion Method on a
Revenue Basis. The State subtracts
revenues associated with the special
cost differentials from total revenues,
and divides this net amount by an
unweighted pupil count.
(4) The Exclusion Method on an
Expenditure Basis. The State subtracts
current expenditures that come from
revenues associated with the special
cost differentials from total current
expenditures, and divides this net
amount by an unweighted pupil count.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 20. Section 222.164 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 222.164 What procedures does the
Secretary follow in making a determination
under section 8009?
(a) * * *
(2) Whenever a proceeding under this
subpart is initiated, the party initiating
the proceeding shall provide either the
State or all LEAs with a complete copy
of the submission required in paragraph
(b) of this section. Following receipt of
the submission, the Secretary shall
notify the State and all LEAs in the State
of their right to request from the
Secretary, within 30 days of the
initiation of a proceeding, the
opportunity to present their views to the
Secretary before the Secretary makes a
determination.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2015–32618 Filed 12–29–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
*
*
*
*
(d) Accounting for Special Cost
Differentials. In computing per-pupil
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
36 CFR Part 294
RIN 0596–AD26
Extension of Comment Period on the
Proposed Rule on Roadless Area
Conservation; National Forests System
Lands in Colorado
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of proposed rule;
extension of comment period.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Forest Service published
a notice in the Federal Register on
November 20, 2015, initiating a 45-day
comment period on the proposed rule
on Roadless Area Conservation;
National Forests System Lands in
Colorado. The closing date for the 45day comment period was January 4,
2016. The Agency is extending the
comment period to January 15, 2016.
DATES: The closing date for the
proposed rule published on November
20, 2015 (80 FR 72665) has been
extended. Comments must be received
by January 15, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted electronically via the Internet
to go.usa.gov/3JQwJ or to
www.regulations.gov. Send written
comments to: Colorado Roadless Rule,
740 Simms Street, Golden, CO 80401.
All comments, including names and
addresses when provided, will be
placed in the project record and
available for public inspections and
copying. The public may inspect
comments received on this proposed
rule at USDA, Forest Service, Ecosystem
Management Coordination Staff, 1400
Independence Ave. SW., Washington,
DC, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on
business days. Those wishing to inspect
comments should call (202) 205–0895
ahead to facilitate an appointment and
entrance to the building. Comments may
also be inspected at USDA, Forest
Service Rocky Mountain Regional
Office, Strategic Planning Staff, 740
Simms, Golden, Colorado, between 8
a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on business days.
Those wishing to inspect comments at
the Regional Office should call (303)
275–5156 ahead to facilitate an
appointment and entrance to the
building.
SUMMARY:
Ken
Tu, Interdisciplinary Team Leader,
Rocky Mountain Regional Office at (303)
275–5156.
Individuals using telecommunication
devices for the deaf may call the Federal
Information Relay Services at 1–800–
*
16:44 Dec 29, 2015
Forest Service
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
§ 222.162 What disparity standard must a
State meet in order to be certified and how
are disparities in current expenditures or
revenues per pupil measured?
VerDate Sep<11>2014
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30DEP1.SGM
30DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 30, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 81477-81494]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32618]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Part 222
RIN 1810-AB24
[ED-2015-OESE-0109]
Impact Aid Programs
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Secretary proposes to amend the Impact Aid Program
regulations issued under title VIII of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA or ``the Act''). The proposed
regulations govern Impact Aid payments to local educational agencies
(LEAs). The program, in general, provides assistance for maintenance
and operations costs to LEAs that are affected by Federal activities.
These proposed regulations would update, clarify, and improve the
current regulations.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before February 16, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not
accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after
the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies,
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to
submit your comments electronically. Information on using
Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents,
submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site
under the help tab at ``How To Use Regulations.gov.''
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you
mail or deliver your comments about these proposed regulations, address
them to Kristen Walls-Rivas, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW., Room 3C103, Washington, DC 20202-6244.
Privacy Note: The Department's policy for comments received from
members of the public is to make these submissions available for public
viewing in their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include
in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly
available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen Walls-Rivas, U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 3C103, Washington, DC
20202-6244. Telephone: (202) 260-3858 or by email: Impact.Aid@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation To Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
these proposed regulations. We specifically invite you to comment on
the ways in which school districts can collect data for counting
federally-connected children for Impact Aid purposes, under proposed
Sec. 222.35; the proposed changes to the Indian policies and
procedures (IPPs) in Sec. Sec. 222.91 and 222.94-95; and the proposed
changes to the equalization disparity test in Sec. 222.162. Regarding
the first of those topics, we invite comment on the following specific
questions:
Are there alternative methods for counting federal-
connected children besides the parent-pupil survey form or source check
collection tools, either in use or that you propose?
[[Page 81478]]
What types of technical assistance would you like the
Department to provide to properly educate and inform LEAs on the two
regulatory methods of data collection, or on other methods?
Can you propose ways in which online or electronic data
collection might be used to facilitate the data collection process?
This may include but is not limited to the electronic collection of
parent-pupil survey forms and the use of student information systems
for Impact Aid data collection.
To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in developing the
final regulations, we urge you to identify clearly the specific section
or sections of the proposed regulations that each of your comments
addresses and to arrange your comments in the same order as the
proposed regulations.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and their overall
requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result from these
proposed regulations. Please let us know of any further ways we could
reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving
the effective and efficient administration of the Department's programs
and activities.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about these proposed regulations by accessing Regulations.gov.
You may also inspect the comments in person at 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Washington, DC time,
Monday through Friday of each week except Federal holidays. Please
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request we will provide an appropriate
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the
public rulemaking record for these proposed regulations. If you want to
schedule an appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary
aid, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Background
The Secretary proposes to amend certain regulations in part 222 of
title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The regulations in
34 CFR part 222 pertain to the Impact Aid Program and implement Title
VIII of the ESEA. The purpose of this regulatory action is to update
the current regulations in response to statutory changes and related
issues that have arisen, as many of the regulations for this section
have not been updated since 1995; to improve clarity and transparency
regarding Federal program operations; and to improve the LEA's
application processes to generate a more accurate data collection,
which will facilitate more timely Impact Aid payments. The Department
published final technical amendments for this program on June 11, 2015,
deleting obsolete provisions and incorporating statutory changes that
did not require notice and comment. These proposed regulations contain
provisions on which we seek comment from the public.
Tribal Consultation: Before developing these proposed regulations,
the Department held two nationally accessible tribal consultation
teleconferences on July 15, 2015, and July 28, 2015, pursuant to
Executive Order 13175 (''Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments''), to solicit tribal input on the Impact Aid
program regulations broadly, and specifically on the provisions that
affect LEAs that claim students living on Indian lands. The Impact Aid
Program announced the consultation teleconferences via the Office of
Indian Education's listserv on July 2, 2015, and July 14, 2015. During
the webinars, the attendees discussed a range of topics, including
Indian lands property verification and data collection, IPPs, and IPP
waivers. The Impact Aid Program received the most feedback on the
regulations concerning IPPs, IPP waivers, and remedies for non-
compliance with IPPs.
There was a concern among many consultation participants that LEAs
are not implementing IPPs with the degree of seriousness intended by
the law and Impact Aid program regulations. Commenters wished to see
LEAs focus more attention on equal participation of Indian students in
all educational programs, including Advanced Placement courses, sports,
and other extra-curricular activities. Some participants were concerned
that LEAs do not provide sufficient time for tribes or parents to
review data regarding participation of Indian children in the LEAs'
programs; others stated that some LEAs provide outdated data to tribal
leaders.
In addition, participants sought more guidance on the standard for
meaningful input from tribal officials and parents of Indian children.
Commenters were further concerned that there is no requirement in the
current Impact Aid regulations that tribes review and affirm that an
LEA is in compliance with the content in the IPP before it is submitted
to the Department for review. Others stated that tribes are not
receiving copies of IPPs at all. Many commenters felt that some LEAs
provide tribal leaders and parents of Indian children insufficient
notice of meetings.
There was also a general concern among many participants that the
current remedy for non-compliance with IPPs, the withholding of an
LEA's Impact Aid payments, is unhelpful, because withholding all funds
would have a negative effect on Indian children. Others stated that the
IPP complaint process is highly adversarial; they wished to see an
intermediate step, such as a requirement that the LEA and tribal
leaders attend a mediation session before a complaint is submitted to
the Department. Commenters indicated that tribes would also like to be
informed when the Department finds that an LEA serving children on the
tribe's land is out of compliance with the IPP requirements.
With regard to the current program regulations regarding an LEA's
ability to submit a waiver from a tribe in lieu of IPPs, commenters
expressed the concern that tribes may be waiving rights without
informed knowledge about what they are waiving.
The Impact Aid Program also heard comments about the verification
of students living on Indian lands. Participants were concerned that
LEAs were not providing sufficient time for tribal officials to confirm
that the students in question resided on Indian land. Participants also
stated that it would be helpful for them and for the officials
certifying Indian land to have customized training that focuses on the
Impact Aid program's requirements.
The Department considered the views gathered during the tribal
consultation process in developing these proposed regulations.
Specifically, proposed provisions regarding IPPs and waivers of IPPs
(Sec. Sec. 222.91, 222.94, and 222.95) reflect this input.
Applicability of the Every Student Succeeds Act
On December 10, 2015, the President signed the Every Student
Succeeds Act (ESSA), Public Law 114-95, 129 Stat. 1802 (2015), which
amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). The
ESSA includes Impact Aid amendments (see new title VII of the ESEA,
formerly title VIII), which take effect starting with fiscal year 2017
payments. Pub. L . 114-95, Sec. 5(d). These proposed regulations are
not directly affected by the ESSA. The statutory provisions underlying
each regulatory provision in this document
[[Page 81479]]
were not affected in a relevant manner by the ESSA. We plan to make any
conforming references needed, including authority citations, in the
final regulations. The Department will be considering in the near
future whether further changes to the Impact Aid regulations are needed
due to the ESSA.
Summary of Proposed Changes
These proposed changes would:
Amend the definition of ``membership'' in Sec. 222.2 to
clarify that an eligible student in membership must live in the same
State as the LEA except in certain circumstances.
Amend Sec. Sec. 222.3 and 222.5 to change the date by
which an LEA may amend its application from September 30 to June 30 of
the year preceding the Federal fiscal year for which it seeks
assistance.
Amend Sec. 222.22 to reflect a statutory change that
would include payments in lieu of taxes (PILTs) and revenues from other
Federal sources in the calculation of compensation from Federal
activities, for purposes of determining eligibility and payments under
section 8002 of the ESEA.
Amend Sec. 222.23 to replace the current provision with a
new provision that describes how LEAs formerly eligible for section
8002 grants, that have consolidated with another LEA, are treated with
respect to section 8002 grant payments.
Amend Sec. 222.30 to exclude Federal charter school
startup funds from the analysis of whether Federal funds provide a
substantial portion of the educational program, for purposes of
determining an LEA's eligibility.
Amend Sec. 222.35 to specify certain unusual
circumstances in which someone other than a parent or legal guardian
may sign a parent-pupil survey form and to require the use of source
check forms to document children residing on Indian lands or in low-
rent housing.
Amend Sec. 222.37 to clarify the options for reporting
average daily attendance and to make them available to all States.
Amend Sec. 222.40 to require that an SEA submit the
rationale for the additional factors selected to identify generally
comparable districts and describe how those factors affect the cost of
educating students.
Amend Sec. 222.91 to add a requirement for an LEA
claiming children residing on Indian lands to include with its
application an assurance that the LEA has responded in writing to input
from the tribes and parents of Indian children received during the IPP
consultation process, prior to submitting the application for Impact
Aid.
Amend Sec. 222.94 to add a requirement that LEAs claiming
children residing on Indian lands respond in writing to input obtained
from parents of Indian children and tribal officials during the IPP
consultation process, disseminate these responses to the parents of
Indian children and tribal officials prior to submission of the Impact
Aid application, and provide a copy of the IPPs to the tribe; and
changing from 60 to 90 days the time period in which an LEA must amend
its IPPs based on its own determination after obtaining tribal input.
Amend Sec. 222.95 to allow the Department to withhold all
or part of the Impact Aid payment from an LEA that is not in compliance
with the requirements of Sec. 222.94, and changing from 60 to 90 days
the time within which LEAs must revise IPPs in response to Department
notification.
Amend Sec. 222.161 to give the SEA the ability to request
permission from the Secretary to make estimated State aid payments that
consider an LEA's Impact Aid payment in the event that the Department
does not make an equalization determination before the start of an
SEA's fiscal year.
Significant Proposed Regulations
We discuss substantive issues under the sections of the proposed
regulations to which they pertain. Generally, we do not address
proposed regulatory changes that are technical or otherwise minor in
effect.
Sec. 222.2 What definitions apply to this part?
Membership
Statute: Section 8003 of the ESEA provides that payments are based
on the number of eligible children in average daily attendance in
schools of the LEA. The definition of ``average daily attendance'' in
section 9101(1) of the ESEA provides in part that average daily
membership can be converted to average daily attendance.
Current Regulations: Paragraph (3) of the current definition of
``membership'' in Sec. 222.2 excludes four categories of students.
Proposed Regulation: The proposed regulation adds an additional
exclusion to paragraph (3) of the definition of ``membership.'' Under
the proposed provision, LEAs could not claim students who reside in a
different State, unless the circumstances described in section 8010(c)
of the Act apply, or unless the student is covered under a formal State
enrollment or tuition agreement.
Reasons: LEAs have sometimes attempted to claim children who reside
in another State but attend school in the LEA. Children who reside in
one State and attend school in a different State are generally excluded
from Impact Aid eligibility by the current regulations because eligible
students must be supported by State aid, and States typically do not
provide State aid for the education of children who reside in other
states. The proposed regulation would clarify this rule and provide the
two exceptions to it: One is statutory (section 8010(c)) and the other
is a situation in which children are covered under a formal written
tuition or enrollment agreement between two States.
Parent Employed on Federal Property
Statute: Under section 8003 of the Act, several categories of
eligible children include those who resided with a parent who is
employed on Federal property.
Current Regulation: Paragraph (1)(i) of the current definition of
``parent employed on Federal property'' in Sec. 222.2 provides that a
parent employed on Federal property is a parent who is employed by the
Federal government and reports to work on Federal property or whose
place of work is on Federal property.
Proposed Regulation: The proposed regulation would clarify the
definition of ``parent employed on Federal property'' by revising
paragraph (1)(i) so it specifically includes parents employed by the
Federal government but who report to an alternate duty station, such as
a telework location, on the survey date.
Paragraph (1)(ii) would not change; paragraph (1)(iii) would be
deleted. Finally, paragraph (2) of the definition would be amended to
further clarify that children whose parent's job includes providing
services on a Federal property, but who are not Federal employees and
whose duty station is not on the Federal property, are not eligible to
be counted for Impact Aid.
Reason: The Telework Enhancement Act of 2010 has increased the
number of Federal employees who telework on a regular basis. The
proposed change to paragraph (1)(i) of the regulation is intended to
include the children of Federal employees who might otherwise not be
considered eligible for Impact Aid purposes because they telework. We
propose deleting the provision in paragraph (1)(iii) because the
provision is obsolete. LEAs have not used this
[[Page 81480]]
provision since it was effective and the Department does not foresee it
being needed in the future. We propose the revision to paragraph (2) to
clarify further that parents who provide services to a Federal
property, but who are not Federal employees and whose main duty station
is not located on Federal property, are not eligible under the
definition of ``parent employed on Federal property.''
Sec. 222.3 How does a local educational agency apply for assistance
under section 8002 or 8003 of the Act?
Statute: Section 8005 of the Act governs the submission of
applications for payments under sections 8002 and 8003 of the Act.
Current Regulations: The current regulation describes how an LEA
applies for assistance under sections 8002 and 8003 of the Act. Section
222.3(b)(2) provides that, under the exceptional circumstances
described in Sec. 222.3(b)(1), an LEA must file its application either
60 days following the event or by September 30 of the Federal fiscal
year preceding the year for which it seeks assistance, whichever comes
later.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulation would change the
application deadline in Sec. 222.3(b)(2) for LEAs with exceptional
circumstances from September 30 to June 30 under section 8002 and 8003.
Reasons: The proposed regulatory change would make Sec.
222.3(b)(2) consistent with the proposed changes in Sec. 222.5, in
which the Department proposes to change the application amendment
deadline from September 30 to June 30. See the discussion of proposed
Sec. 222.5 directly below for the reasons for that change.
Sec. 222.5 When may a local educational agency amend its application?
Statute: Section 8005 of the Act governs the submission of
applications for payments under sections 8002 and 8003 of the Act.
Current Regulations: Under Sec. 222.5(a)(2), an LEA may amend its
application for situations described in Sec. 222.3(b)(1) by September
30 following the January application deadline. In addition, Sec.
222.5(b) permits an LEA that did not have data available at the time it
filed its application, such as after a second membership count, to
amend its application by September 30.
Proposed Regulations: The Department proposes to change the
amendment deadlines in Sec. Sec. 222.5(a)(2) and 222.5(b)(2) from
September 30 to June 30.
Reasons: The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2013
mandates that Impact Aid payments be made no later than two years after
the funds are appropriated. Many LEAs submit their applications in
January of each year showing incomplete counts of eligible children and
submit amendments as late as September 30 to provide complete and
accurate information. This procedure inhibits the Department's ability
to review the applications and prepare initial payments. A June 30th
amendment deadline will ensure that the Department receives complete
application information for the review of data and release of funds in
a timely manner.
Sec. 222.22 How does the Secretary treat compensation from Federal
activities for purposes of determining eligibility and payment?
Statute: Section 8002(a) of the Act provides that an LEA is not
eligible for a payment under section 8002 if it is substantially
compensated for the loss in revenue resulting from Federal ownership of
land. Compensation is measured by increases in revenue from the conduct
of Federal activities, but the statute does not define ``substantial
compensation.'' Section 8002(b) contains a maximum payment provision
that takes into account the amount of revenue received by the LEA from
activities conducted on Federal property; those revenues specifically
include payments received from any Federal agency other than the
Department or education-related payments from the Department of Defense
(DOD).
Current Regulation: For purposes of determining an LEA's
eligibility and maximum payment under section 8002, the current
regulations provide in Sec. 222.22 that an LEA is substantially
compensated if its other Federal revenue exceeds its maximum payment
amount under Section 8002. In Sec. 222.22(d) the regulation excludes
from ``other Federal revenue'' only payments from the DOD.
Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec. 222.22(b)(1) would specifically
include payments in lieu of taxes (PILTS) received from any other
Federal agencies in the amount of revenue received by the LEA from
activities conducted on Federal property, for purposes of determining
an LEA's eligibility for, and amount of, payment under section 8002 of
the Act.
Reasons: This proposed revision would conform with the statutory
requirements for calculating the revenue received by an LEA, in
determining both eligibility and the maximum payment under section 8002
of the Act. The proposed regulation would specify that PILTs, which are
payments from other Federal agencies, are part of revenues considered
for eligibility and maximum payment purposes. In addition, by
including, in proposed paragraph (b)(1), payments received by any other
Federal agency, that means we do not take into account Federal funds
from the Department, consistent with the statute and with current
Department practice.
Sec. 222.23 How are consolidated local educational agencies treated
for the purposes of eligibility and payment under section 8002?
Statute: Section 8002(g) of the Act contains provisions granting
eligibility to certain districts that consolidated from two or more
former districts prior to 1995. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of
2014 (Pub. L. 113-76) amended this provision to also permit LEAs that
consolidated after 2005 to receive a section 8002 foundation payment if
one of the former districts was eligible for section 8002 funds for the
fiscal year prior to consolidation.
Current Regulation: There is no current regulation regarding the
eligibility of consolidated districts. The current regulation at Sec.
222.23 contains the previous formula for calculating a section 8002
payment under statutory provisions that have been replaced.
Proposed Regulation: We propose to remove Sec. 222.23 in its
entirety and replace it with the proposed regulatory language regarding
consolidated districts. The new regulation would clarify which
consolidated LEAs are eligible, what documentation is necessary to
prove eligibility, and how foundation payments are calculated for
consolidated districts when more than one former district qualifies.
The regulation would also clarify that consolidated LEAs remain
eligible for section 8002 funds as long as the amount of Federal land
in at least one former LEA upon which eligibility is based (i.e. the
LEA that was eligible for Section 8002 funds in the prior fiscal year)
comprises at least 10 percent of the taxable value of the former LEA at
the time of Federal acquisition.
Reasons: The 2014 statutory change created a new category of school
districts that qualify for section 8002 grant funds, and this
regulation would clarify the eligibility and payment for these
districts, as well as for districts eligible under the previous
statutory provision. The proposed regulation will require that the
consolidated district still contains, within the boundaries of
[[Page 81481]]
one of its former districts, Federal property that comprises at least
10 percent of the taxable value of the former LEA at the time of
Federal acquisition. This is to ensure that an LEA will not receive
both tax revenue and section 8002 funds for the same property, if a
significant amount of previously-eligible Federal land within the
boundaries of the former district has been sold and is no longer
prohibited from being taxed.
The regulation would also provide that an eligible consolidated LEA
receives only a foundation payment and not any ``remaining funds.''
Remaining funds require submission of data by LEAs to calculate a
maximum payment, and a consolidated LEA's payment is based only on the
last payment received by a former LEA, so there is no documentation
available with which to calculate a maximum payment. The provisions
that are proposed in this section reflect current Department practice.
Sec. 222.24 How does a local educational agency that has multiple tax
rates for real property classifications derive a single real property
tax rate?
Statute: Section 8002(b)(2) of the Act requires the Secretary to
use an LEA's current levied real property tax rate for current
expenditures in calculating an LEA's maximum payment amount under
section 8002 of the Act.
Current Regulation: None.
Proposed Regulation: This proposed new regulation would describe
how an LEA with multiple tax rates for different property
classifications derives a single tax rate. Essentially, the LEA divides
the total revenues it received from property taxes by the assessed
valuation of the property in the LEA.
Reasons: The statutory formula requires a single tax rate for an
LEA. Taxing jurisdictions often set different tax rates for each type
of property, resulting in multiple tax rates within an LEA. This
provision would mandate a standardized arithmetic procedure to
determine a single tax rate under section 8002, and reflects current
practice.
Sec. 222.30 What is ``free public education''?
Statute: Section 8013(6) of the Act defines ``free public
education.'' The definition includes the requirement that education
must be at public expense, under public supervision and direction, and
without tuition charge.
Current Regulations: The current regulatory definition of ``free
public education'' in Sec. 222.30(2)(ii) states in relevant part that
education is provided at public expense if Federal funds, other than
Impact Aid funds, do not constitute a substantial portion of the
educational program.
Proposed Regulation: The proposed regulation would exclude Federal
charter school startup grant funds (Title V, part B, subpart I) from
the calculation of the Federal portion that funds an LEA's educational
program. The regulation would also add a provision clarifying that the
Secretary analyzes whether a substantial portion of the education
program is funded by Federal sources by comparing the LEA's finances to
other LEAs in the State.
Reasons: Under section 8003(a) of the Act, an LEA can only claim
students for Impact Aid if the LEA provides a free public education to
those students. Section 8003 Impact Aid funds are intended to replace
lost local revenues due to Federal activity. Under the current
regulations, if Federal funds are providing for the educational program
(e.g. schools funded by the Department of Interior), then the lack of
local tax revenue is already being compensated by another Federal
source. As a result, the LEA is not eligible for Impact Aid for those
students.
The proposed regulation would also exclude charter school startup
funds from the calculation of whether Federal funds provide a
substantial portion of an LEA's program. These funds are generally
available in the first two years of a charter school's operations; they
can be used for a host of purposes other than current expenditures, and
they are not long-term funding sources.
Under the proposed regulation, in analyzing the portion of the
education program that is funded by Federal sources, the Department
would compare the LEA's finances to other LEAs in the State to account
for the circumstances unique to the State.
Sec. 222.32 What information does the Secretary use to determine a
local educational agency's basic support payment?
Statute: Section 8005(b)(1) of the Act specifies that an LEA must
submit an application that includes information for the Secretary to be
able to determine the LEA's eligibility and payment amount.
Current Regulations: Section 222.32(b) requires that an LEA must
submit its federally connected membership based on a student count
described in Sec. Sec. 222.33 through 222.35 of the regulations.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulation would clarify that
the LEA must submit its federally connected membership count in its
timely and complete annual application.
Reasons: The proposed regulation would clarify that each LEA must
include an accurate membership count in its application by the deadline
of January 31. In recent years, the Department's Impact Aid field
reviews of LEAs have revealed that some applicants submitted estimated
data on the section 8003 Impact Aid application, and then relied on the
amendment process to provide the actual counted data. Accurate
application information must be submitted before the program can review
the application and calculate payments. If LEAs submit estimated data
and rely on the amendment process to provide accurate data, the Impact
Aid Program is delayed in processing payments to all districts.
Sec. 222.33 When must an applicant make its membership count?
Statute: Section 8003 of the Act does not directly address when an
LEA must make its membership count. The Secretary has the authority to
regulate when an LEA calculates its membership under 20 U.S.C. 1221-e
and 3474.
Current Regulations: The current regulation refers to the ``first
or only'' membership count.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulation would remove the
reference to the first or only membership count. Additionally, the
proposed regulation would clarify that the data from the only
membership count must be complete by the application deadline.
Reasons: The proposed regulatory change in Sec. 222.34 (see below)
would eliminate the current regulatory option of a second membership
count. That change in turn would eliminate the need to reference first
or only membership count, since there would be only one count. The
proposed language in Sec. 222.33(c) stating that the LEA must complete
its membership count by the application deadline supports the proposed
changes in Sec. 222.32 that would help to ensure submission of a
complete application by the deadline.
Sec. 222.34 If an applicant makes a second membership count, when must
that count be made?
Statute: Section 8003 of the Act does not directly address when an
LEA must make its membership count. The Secretary has the authority to
regulate when an LEA calculates its membership under 20 U.S.C. 1221-e
and 3474.
Current Regulations: The current regulation describes the process
for undertaking a second membership survey.
[[Page 81482]]
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulations would delete this
provision and reserve the section for future use.
Reasons: This provision has become obsolete over time. The second
membership survey provision has not been used since 2012 and at that
time it was used by only two LEAs. This change would streamline the
review process to support timely and accurate payments. Allowing second
membership surveys late in the year causes delays in the review process
and potentially delays payment. The Department has determined that the
impact of removing this provision is low and the benefits outweigh any
foreseen consequence.
Sec. 222.35 How does a local educational agency count the membership
of its federally connected children?
Statute: Section 8005(b)(1) of the Act specifies that an LEA must
submit an application that includes information for the Secretary to be
able to determine the LEA's eligibility and payment amount.
Current Regulations: The current regulation describes the
information required on a parent-pupil survey form and on a source
check form.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulation would reorganize
paragraph (a) regarding parent-pupil survey forms, to first list the
information required for all types of children, followed by specific
requirements for certain categories of children. In addition, proposed
paragraph (a)(4) would clarify for LEAs the rare situations in which an
LEA may accept a parent-pupil survey form that is not signed by a
parent or legal guardian. The regulation also would clarify that the
Department will not accept parent-pupil survey forms signed by an
employee of the LEA, unless the employee is a parent of a child
attending school within the LEA, signing their own child's form.
Proposed paragraph (b) pertains to source check documents, which
are a data collection alternative to the parent-pupil survey form. The
proposed regulations would require source check documents for children
residing on Indian lands and for children residing in eligible low-rent
housing. Under the proposed regulation, the source check forms must
contain sufficient information to verify the eligibility of both the
Federal property and the individual children claimed on the source
check form.
Reasons: With regard to parent-pupil survey forms, recent Impact
Aid field reviews of LEAs have revealed instances of LEA staff members
signing forms for parents or verifying the information by phone,
without a parent signature on the form. The proposed revisions to
paragraph (a) would clarify the requirements and provide examples of
the few unusual situations in which someone other than a parent may
sign a parent-pupil survey form. In no instance would an employee of
the LEA be permitted to sign a form for a parent. These proposed
changes reflect current Department policy.
Paragraph (b) would be revised to require that LEAs claiming
children who reside on Indian lands, and children who reside in low-
rent housing, use a source check document to obtain the data required
to determine the children's eligibility. The parent-pupil survey form
is insufficient to document the different types of eligible Indian
lands property and low-rent housing property and confirm that
property's eligibility, because parents are unlikely to have the
necessary documentation or information. In order to ensure accurate and
timely eligibility and payment determinations, LEAs need to reach out
directly to the government entities (e.g. for Indian lands--tribal
officials, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) staff, and/or tax assessors;
for low-rent housing--the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and/or local housing authorities) who have access to
the records that document the legal status of a specific parcel of land
and can certify that the status is consistent with the Federal property
definition.
Sec. 222.37 How does the Secretary calculate the average daily
attendance of federally connected children?
Statute: Section 8003 the Act requires that payments be based on
the average daily attendance (ADA) of federally connected children.
Section 9101(1) of the Act defines ADA.
Current Regulations: The current regulations describe the process
for calculating ADA for LEAs that reside in States that use actual ADA
when determining State aid, and for LEAs that reside in States where
something other than ADA is used to calculate State aid. The current
regulations also describe other options for LEAs or States if the State
does not use ADA for determining State aid, including the use of a
State average attendance ratio (which has informally been referred to
as a ``negotiated ratio,''), sampling, or the use of data similar to
ADA.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulation would reorganize this
section so that the options for LEAs, the States, and the Secretary are
grouped together by actor. The proposed regulation would allow any
State to ask the Secretary for a State average attendance ratio. In
addition, in cases where there is reliable public data, the Secretary
may calculate a State average attendance ratio.
Reasons: Use of a State average attendance ratio typically benefits
most LEAs and those that do not benefit have the option to submit
actual attendance data to obtain a higher payment. Currently, 35 States
have a State average attendance ratio. The proposed change would give
LEAs in all States the opportunity to use a State average attendance
ratio and alternative options for obtaining an attendance rate. This
would reduce the LEAs' data collection burden and provide more options
for each LEA to obtain a higher attendance rate, which may typically
result in a higher Impact Aid payment.
Sec. 222.40 What procedures does a State educational agency use for
certain local educational agencies to determine generally comparable
local educational agencies using additional factors, for local
contribution rate purposes?
Statute: Section 8003(b)(1) of the Act contains the formula for
determining an LEA's maximum payment amount, based in part on
calculating each LEA's local contribution rate (LCR). The statute
states that the LCR is to be determined under the procedures set forth
in the Department's regulations as they were in effect on January 1,
1994.
Current Regulations: The current regulations in Sec. 222.39-Sec.
222.41 provide that an LEA's LCR is determined by identifying generally
comparable districts. Under Sec. 222.40, for certain qualifying LEAs,
the SEA may use additional factors in identifying the generally
comparable LEAs for the purpose of calculating and certifying an LCR.
Section 222.40(d) provides that if an SEA proposes to use a special
additional factor to select a group of generally comparable districts
(GCDs) to support a higher LCR for a specific LEA, it must be a
generally accepted, objectively defined factor that affects the LEA's
cost of educating its students.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulation would clarify that
SEAs that wish to use special additional factors to identify GCDs for
purposes of calculating a higher LCR for certain LEAs must provide a
rationale and explain how the selected factor or factors affect the
cost of education. The proposed regulation does not substantively alter
the manner in which the LCRs are calculated.
Reasons: To determine GCDs for local contribution rate purposes, an
SEA may use a special additional factor only if that factor has an
impact on the cost of
[[Page 81483]]
education for an LEA. In the past, the Department has had to contact
the SEA to learn the rationale for a specific factor or factors after
the GCD data were submitted. Requiring the rationale as part of the
submission process would help ensure timely and accurate payments to
the LEAs in the State.
Sec. 222.62 How are local educational agencies determined eligible
under section 8003(b)(2)?
Statute: Section 8003(b)(2) of the Act contains the requirements
for eligibility and payment for heavily impacted districts.
Current Regulations: The current regulation does not address how an
applicant may apply for heavily impacted funding under section
8003(b)(2) on the Impact Aid application.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulation would require that an
LEA that wishes to be considered for a heavily impacted payment under
section 8003(b)(2) submit with its initial application the information
needed to establish eligibility.
Reasons: The majority of applicants that request assistance under
section 8003(b)(2) do not meet the eligibility requirements for these
payments, nor have they investigated the eligibility requirements and
learned whether they may qualify. Requiring the LEAs to submit the
supporting documentation that indicates potential eligibility would
facilitate faster determinations of eligibility and payment for heavily
impacted districts. This proposed regulatory change would be
complemented by a change to the application forms to require submission
of a brief document certified by the SEA to trigger a Department review
for section 8003(b)(2) eligibility.
Sec. 222.91 What requirements must a local educational agency meet to
receive a payment under section 8003 of the Act for children residing
on Indian lands?
Statute: Section 8004 of the Act requires that an LEA claiming
children who reside on Indian lands must establish IPPs. As an
alternative, the LEA may obtain a waiver of this requirement from each
tribe indicating that the tribe is satisfied with the educational
services the LEA is providing to the children of the tribe.
Current Regulations: The current regulation requires that an LEA
claiming children residing on Indian lands submit with its application
its IPPs and a signed assurance attesting that the LEA developed its
IPPs in consultation with the parents of Indian children and tribal
officials. The current regulation provides that in the alternative, an
LEA can submit documentation that the LEA has received a waiver that
complies with section 8004(c) of the Act.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulation would require an
assurance that the LEA has provided a written response to the comments,
recommendations, and concerns expressed by the parents of children who
reside on Indian lands and tribal officials during the IPP consultation
process. In addition, the proposed regulation would require that an IPP
waiver submitted with an application include a written statement from
an appropriate tribal official stating that the tribe has received a
copy and understands the requirements of Sec. Sec. 222.91 and 222.94
that are being waived and that it is satisfied with the LEA's
educational services provided to the tribe's students. An LEA would be
required to submit its waiver at the time it submits its application.
Reasons: The Department's tribal consultations yielded many
concerns from the Indian community that LEAs are not engaging in
meaningful consultation with the tribes and families, or providing
meaningful opportunities for engagement and communication. One of the
concerns most frequently voiced was that LEAs have not considered the
tribes or parents' comments, concerns or recommendations when creating
the educational program or making decisions about school-sponsored
activities.
The Department has taken these concerns into account and proposes
to add to the Impact Aid section 8003 application package an assurance
that the LEA has provided written responses to comments, concerns, or
recommendations received through the IPP consultation process. This
assurance does not mean that an LEA must adopt any specific
recommendations; rather it will require the LEAs to explain in writing
to the parents of Indian children and tribal officials why the LEA is
not adopting the recommendations, or how it will implement or take into
consideration those recommendations or concerns.
With regard to a waiver of IPPs, the proposed rules would clarify
that a waiver must be voluntary and must reflect an understanding on
the part of the tribal official of the rights being waived. The
statutory option of a waiver was intended to be used only when a tribe
is truly satisfied with an LEA's program and services, and not as a way
for an LEA to avoid the IPP process. The proposed regulation would
require that a waiver be submitted with the application and not later;
in the past when the Department has reviewed IPPs, some LEAs have
submitted a waiver as an application amendment in order to avoid
amending the IPPs, under circumstances that call into question whether
the waiver has been knowing and voluntary on the part of the tribe.
Based on the discussions during the consultation process, the
Department is also considering administrative options, such as
providing additional technical assistance to better support and assist
LEAs, parents, and tribal officials as they negotiate the IPP
consultation process.
Sec. 222.94 What provisions must be included in a local educational
agency's Indian policies and procedures?
Statute: Section 8004 of the Act states that an LEA claiming
children residing on Indian lands must establish and maintain a set of
IPPs in order to receive funds under section 8003 of the Act. The IPPs
are intended to ensure: That Indian children participate on an equal
basis in the educational program and activities sponsored by the LEA;
that parents of Indian children and tribal leaders are given the
opportunity to present their views on programs and activities and make
recommendations; that the LEA consults with parents of Indian children
and tribal leaders in the planning and development of the educational
program and activities; and that the LEA disseminates evaluations,
reports and program plans to the parents of Indian children and the
tribes.
Current Regulations: The current regulation identifies eight
specific procedures than an LEA must describe in its IPPs. The IPPs
must describe how the LEA: (1) Gives tribal officials and parents of
Indian children the opportunity to comment on whether or not Indian
children participate on an equal basis with non-Indian children in the
LEA's educational program and school sponsored activities; (2) assesses
whether or not Indian children participate on an equal basis; (3)
modifies, if necessary, its education program to ensure equal
participation for Indian children; (4) disseminates relevant
documentation related to the education programs to parents of Indian
children and tribes with sufficient time to allow the tribes and
parents of Indian children an opportunity to review the documentation
and make informed recommendations on the needs of the Indian children;
(5) gathers information concerning Indian views in general and related
to the frequency, location, and time of meetings; (6) notifies Indian
[[Page 81484]]
parents and tribes of the time and location of meetings; (7) consults
and involves tribal officials and parents of Indian children in the
planning and development phase of the LEA's education programs and
activities; and (8) modifies the IPPs, if necessary.
Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulation would reorganize the
information from Sec. Sec. 222.94 and 222.95(e)-(g); it would also add
a requirement that the LEA respond in writing, at least annually, to
the comments and recommendations of the tribes or parents of Indian
children and disseminate these responses to the tribes and parents
prior to the submission of the IPPs to the Department. The regulation
would also require the LEA to provide a copy of the IPPs to the tribe
annually. Additionally, the proposed regulation would move paragraphs
(e)-(g) of section Sec. 222.95 to the revised Sec. 222.94. Under
those relocated provisions, proposed Sec. 222.94(c)(3) would change
the number of days that an LEA has to amend its IPPs, if it determines
that they are not in compliance, from 60 days to 90 days.
Reasons: The proposed provisions of Sec. Sec. 222.94 and
222.95(e)-(g) are reorganized for clarity and order. Proposed Sec.
222.94 would emphasize that the LEA must consult with, and actively
solicit involvement from, the local tribes and parents of Indian
children in the development of both the IPPs and the educational
program and activities.
Proposed Sec. 222.94(b)(5) would add a requirement that the LEA
provide written responses at least annually to comments and
recommendations received through the IPP consultation process. This
proposal stems from one of the most frequent concerns raised during the
Indian consultation; that many LEAs have not considered the tribes or
parents' comments, concerns or recommendations when creating the
educational program or making decisions about school-sponsored
activities. This provision would not require that an LEA adopt any
specific recommendations; rather it would require the LEA to explain in
writing to the parents of Indian children and tribal officials why the
LEA is not adopting the recommendations, or how it will implement or
take into consideration those recommendations or concerns. The LEA's
response would demonstrate how the feedback has been thoughtfully
considered in the development of the educational program, and would be
reflected in the IPPs. Optimally, the outcome of the IPP consultation
process would be a document that demonstrates to the tribe that the LEA
has heard and acknowledged the feedback from the parents of Indian
children and tribes.
In addition, we learned during consultations that tribes do not
always have access to a copy of the IPPs; thus the revisions would
require the LEA to provide a copy of the IPPs to the tribe annually.
Because LEAs are often required by State or local law to have the
school board (or equivalent) certify any changes to the IPPs, extending
the time that an LEA has to revise its IPPs from 60 to 90 days would
allow time for both the revision and any necessary procedural steps.
The provisions in proposed paragraph (c) were moved from current Sec.
222.95(e)-(g) to keep the provisions related to the creation, content,
and revision of IPPs under one regulatory section.
Sec. 222.95 How are Indian policies and procedures reviewed to ensure
compliance with the requirements in section 8004(a) of the Act?
Statute: Section 8004(e) of the Act provides for a complaint
procedure for tribes with regard to IPPs. Under certain circumstances
following a hearing and a determination by the Secretary, if the
Department finds that the LEA is still in noncompliance with the
provisions of section 8004, the Department must withhold Impact Aid
payments to the LEA until the LEA undertakes the required remedy,
unless the withholding would substantially disrupt the LEA's education
programs.
Current Regulations: The current regulation describes how the
Department reviews and evaluates IPPs to ensure compliance with
Sec. Sec. 222.91 and 222.94. It provides that the Secretary will
review IPPs periodically to ensure compliance. If an LEA is not in
compliance, the Secretary will notify the LEA in writing of the
deficiencies.
Current Sec. 222.95(d) states that the Department may withhold all
payments if the LEA fails to bring its IPPs into compliance within 60
days of receipt of the Department's formal notification.
Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 222.95(c) would change the
number of days that an LEA has to remedy issues of noncompliance from
60 days to 90 days. The proposed regulation would also change the
provision on withholding all section 8003 payments to the option to
withhold all or part of the section 8003 payments. Finally, the
proposed regulations would move paragraphs (e)-(g) of current Sec.
222.95 into proposed Sec. 222.94.
Reasons: LEAs often need to have the school board (or equivalent
body) certify any changes to the IPPs. Extending the time that an LEA
has to revise its IPPs following Department notification from 60 to 90
days would allow time for both the revision and school board
certification.
Under the current withholding provisions, if an LEA does not
correct deficiencies in its IPPs within 60 days, the Department's only
sanction is to withhold all section 8003 payments, unless the
withholding would substantially disrupt the LEA's education programs.
As many LEAs rely heavily on Impact Aid funds, withholding all section
8003 funds would prevent some LEAs from being able to provide an
adequate educational program to the students they serve. The
Secretary's intent in proposing to amend this regulation is to adopt
clear, fair, and flexible withholding procedures in the event a
withholding action is required. We learned through the tribal
consultation that tribes favor incentives to encourage LEAs to bring
deficient IPPs into compliance with the law in a way that does not
interrupt the educational services provided to their children. The
proposed withholding procedure balances the need for compliance with
the interests of ensuring the LEA has the resources needed to provide
adequate educational services to the children they serve.
Regarding the comments we heard requesting a more informal process
for resolving disputes about IPPs, we fully encourage school districts
and tribes to use alternative methods of dispute resolution, such as
mediation or arbitration. This could obviate the need for a formal
complaint to the Department, and nothing in the proposed or current
regulations would prevent such a step. In addition, a party, once it
has initiated a formal complaint, may request the Department to stay
the proceedings to pursue mediation, and the Department would do so if
both parties agree. In addition, the Impact Aid Program is willing to
provide technical assistance to both parties to facilitate a common
understanding before a formal complaint is launched.
Subpart K--Determinations Under Section 8009 of the Act
Section 222.161 How is State aid treated under Section 8009 of the Act?
Statute: Section 8009(d)(2) of the Act prohibits States from taking
Impact Aid into consideration as local revenues when making State aid
payments before the Secretary certifies that the State's program of aid
is equalized.
Current Regulations: The current regulation in Sec. 222.161(a)(5)
repeats the statutory prohibition against a State taking Impact Aid
into consideration
[[Page 81485]]
before being certified. The current regulation does not specifically
address the data needed from a State that was not previously certified
but that is now requesting certification under section 8009 of the Act.
Proposed Regulations: Under the proposed regulations, if the
Secretary has not issued a certification before the beginning of the
State's fiscal year, the State may request permission from the
Secretary to make estimated State aid payments that take Impact Aid
into account as local revenue. Before granting permission, the
Secretary would consider whether the Secretary certified the State as
equalized for the prior fiscal year, and whether the State revised its
State aid program since the date of the prior year's certification.
Also, the State must assure that if the State does not meet the
disparity standard, the State will reimburse each LEA the amount
deducted, within 60 days of the Department's determination.
The proposed regulations would also clarify that if the Secretary
has not previously certified a State's program of State aid and the
State wishes to apply for certification, the State would submit
projected data showing that it would meet the disparity standard if it
were authorized to deduct Impact Aid under section 8009 of the Act.
Reasons: The Department interprets section 8009 of the Act to
prohibit States from making final, as opposed to estimated, State aid
payments that consider eligible Impact Aid funds as local effort
without the Secretary's certification. In instances where a State or
LEA requests a pre-determination hearing under Sec. 222.164(b)(5) and
the issues presented are complex, the Secretary may not be able to make
a final determination as to whether the State is equalized before the
beginning of the State's fiscal year. In these instances, States should
have the option of including estimated eligible Impact Aid revenues as
local effort when making estimated State aid payments, rather than
removing these Impact Aid revenues from consideration. Because
certifications apply to an entire State fiscal year, if a State were
required to remove Impact Aid revenues from estimated State aid
payments and the Secretary later determines that the State is
equalized, the State would need to adjust all State aid payments and
Impact Aid recipients would have to return funds to the State. This
could seriously destabilize an LEA's budget. On the other hand, if the
State begins by taking eligible Impact Aid payments into account in its
estimated State aid payments, as these regulations propose, and the
Secretary does not certify the State as equalized, the State would have
to increase each Impact Aid LEA's State aid within 60 days. The effect
on the LEA's budget would then be positive, rather than negative. Even
though the State would have to come up with additional funds, States
are not required to request this advanced permission to make estimated
payments that consider Impact Aid.
Definition of Current Expenditures
Statute: Section 8013(4) of the Act defines ``current
expenditures.''
Current Regulations: The current regulation in paragraph (c)
repeats the definition of ``current expenditures'' in the Act, and
lists specific exclusions from that definition for the purposes of
section 8009, such as expenditures from revenues designated for special
cost differentials.
Proposed Regulations: The Department proposes that the regulatory
definition for ``current expenditures'' refer to, rather than repeat,
the definition in section 8013(4) of the Act, and then list the
additional exclusion for purposes of section 8009 of the Act. We would
remove the exclusions in current subparagraphs (1) through (5) as part
of the reorganized definition.
Reasons: Referring applicants to the statutory definition of
``current expenditures'' will reduce redundancy. Subparagraphs (1) and
(2) are contained in the statutory definition and thus are not needed.
The intent of paragraphs (3) and (4), regarding special cost
differentials, will be more clearly addressed by proposed Sec.
222.162, which would define the four acceptable methods of calculating
cost differentials for purposes of the disparity test. The substance of
the current subparagraph (5) is combined into the text of the proposed
regulation for clarity.
Section 222.162 What disparity standard must a State meet in order to
be certified and how are disparities in current expenditures or
revenues per pupil measured?
Statute: Section 8009(b)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act states that when
certifying a State as equalized, the Secretary may take into account
the extent to which a State aid program reflects additional costs of
providing education in areas with special geographical factors or for
students with particular needs, such as students with disabilities.
Current Regulations: The current regulations explain the data a
State should submit to the Secretary as evidence that its State aid
program is equalized. The regulations identify the types of ``special
cost differentials'' a State may account for when calculating per-pupil
expenditures or revenues for each LEA, but do not explain specifically
how these differentials are to be considered.
Proposed Regulations: The Department proposes that a State may
account for special cost differentials in one of four ways: The
inclusion method on a revenue basis, the inclusion method on an
expenditure basis, the exclusion method on a revenue basis, or the
exclusion method on an expenditure basis. Using the inclusion method, a
State would divide an LEA's revenue or total current expenditures by a
pupil count that includes weights associated with special cost
differentials. Using the exclusion method, a State would take an LEA's
total revenues or current expenditures, subtract those revenues or
expenditures associated with special cost differentials, and divide by
the LEA's unweighted pupil count.
Reasons: The current regulations are not clear regarding how States
should treat special cost differentials in submitting data under the
disparity test. The Department's longstanding interpretation of section
8009 of the Act and Sec. 222.162 of the regulations is that there are
four methods available, logically and mathematically, for treating
those cost differentials. Explicitly defining the four options for
taking special cost differentials into account would clarify the
Department's long-standing interpretation of the statute, and avoid
potential controversy over data submission under section 8009.
Section 222.164 What procedures does the Secretary follow in making a
determination under section 8009?
Statute: Section 8009(c)(2) of the Act states that before making a
determination under section 8009, the Secretary shall afford the State,
and LEAs in the State, an opportunity to present their views.
Current Regulations: Under the current regulations, the party
initiating the proceeding under section 8009 shall notify the State and
all LEAs in the State of their right to present views before the
Secretary makes a determination.
Proposed Regulations: The Department proposes that the Secretary,
rather than a State or LEA initiating a proceeding, notify the State
and all LEAs in the State of their right to present their views before
the Secretary makes a determination under section 8009.
Reasons: It is more practical for the Secretary to send the
notification that the State and all LEAs in the State may present
views, because the Department coordinates the predetermination
[[Page 81486]]
hearing, and the request for the informal hearing needs to be made to
the Department. In current practice, the Department notifies all LEAs
in the State when the State submits written notice of its intention to
consider Impact Aid payments in providing State aid to LEAs, and at
that time gives instructions for requesting a predetermination hearing.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether
this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to
the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely
to result in a rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or
tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the
Executive order.
This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866.
We have also reviewed these regulations under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing these proposed regulations only on a reasoned
determination that their benefits would justify their costs. In
choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those
approaches that would maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that
follows, the Department believes that these proposed regulations are
consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this regulatory action would not
unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs associated
with this regulatory action are those resulting from statutory
requirements and those we have determined as necessary for
administering the Department's programs and activities. Upon review of
the costs to the LEA, we have determined there is minimal financial or
resource burden associated with these changes, and that the net impact
of the changes would be a reduction in burden hours. Certain affected
LEAs would need to respond in writing to comments from tribes and
parents of Indian students, but this time burden would be balanced by
other proposed regulatory changes that reduce the burden, which result
in a net decrease of both burden hours and cost associated with these
regulations.
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum ``Plain
Language in Government Writing'' require each agency to write
regulations that are easy to understand.
The Secretary invites comments on how to make these proposed
regulations easier to understand, including answers to questions such
as the following:
Are the requirements in the proposed regulations clearly
stated?
Do the proposed regulations contain technical terms or
other wording that interferes with their clarity?
Does the format of the proposed regulations (grouping and
order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce
their clarity?
Would the proposed regulations be easier to understand if
we divided them into more (but shorter) sections? (A ``section'' is
preceded by the symbol ``Sec. '' and a numbered heading; for example,
Sec. 222.2 What definitions apply to this part?)
Could the description of the proposed regulations in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble be more helpful in
making the proposed regulations easier to understand? If so, how?
What else could we do to make the proposed regulations
easier to understand? To send any comments that concern how the
Department could make these proposed regulations easier to understand,
see the instructions in the ADDRESSES section.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that these proposed regulations would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The U.S. Small Business Administration Size Standards define
institutions as ``small entities'' if they are for-profit or nonprofit
institutions with total annual revenue below $5,000,000 or if they are
institutions controlled by governmental entities with populations below
50,000. These proposed regulations would affect LEAs that meet this
definition; therefore, these proposed regulations would affect small
entities, but they would not have a significant economic impact on
these entities.
The proposed regulations would benefit both small and large
institutions, including those that qualify as small entities, by
removing the paperwork burden for reporting average daily attendance,
reducing the burden for collection of data for the LEAs reporting
children residing on Indian lands and low-rent housing. Multiple
children can
[[Page 81487]]
be verified on one form instead of one form per child. Thus, small
entities would experience regulatory relief and a positive economic
impact as a result of these proposed regulations.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, the Department provides the general public and Federal agencies
with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collections
of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps ensure that: The public
understands the Department's collection instructions, respondents can
provide the requested data in the desired format, reporting burden
(time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are
clearly understood, and the Department can properly assess the impact
of collection requirements on respondents.
Sections 222.35, 222.37, 222.40, 222.62, and 222.91 contain
information collection requirements. Under the PRA the Department has
submitted a copy of these sections to OMB for its review.
A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of
information unless OMB approves the collection under the PRA and the
corresponding information collection instrument displays a currently
valid OMB control number. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
no person is required to comply with, or is subject to penalty for
failure to comply with, a collection of information if the collection
instrument does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
In the final regulations we will display the control number
assigned by OMB to any information collection requirement proposed in
this NPRM and adopted in the final regulations.
The Department currently collects information from LEA applicants
for the Impact Aid program using a program-specific grant application
package (OMB Control Number 1810-0687). The application package, and
some information grantees are required to submit, would change as a
result of the proposed regulations.
We estimate the total burden for the collection of information
through the application package to be 104,720 hours. Based on past
experience with this program, we estimate that a total of 1,264
applications would be received annually for the grant program. We
estimate that it would take each applicant 82.8 hours to complete the
application package, including time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The
proposed changes to the regulations would change the burden hours for
this collection by -35,959.
Collection of Information
Section 222.35
The proposed regulations would require that LEAs claiming children
who reside on Indian lands, and children who reside in low-rent
housing, use a source check document to obtain the data required to
determine the children's eligibility. The current burden hour
estimation includes 500,000 parent respondents for the parent pupil
survey form estimating 15 minutes per form for a total burden hours of
125,000 burden hours. The new provision would reduce the total number
of parent respondents to 355,000 because the 145,000 children residing
on Indian lands or low rent housing will no longer be surveyed using
the parent pupil survey form. The burden hours for this category would
reduce to 88,750 total burden hours. This is a reduction of 36,250
burden hours.
The 145,000 children are distributed across approximately 500 LEAs.
The previous burden hour calculation included 500 LEAs at an average of
3 hours for source checks per LEA, resulting in 1,500 total burden
hours. Under the proposed regulation, the number of LEAs would increase
to 1,000 LEAs increasing the burden hours to 3,000 for source checks,
an increase of 1,500 burden hours. The net change in burden hours
between parent pupil survey forms and source checks is a decrease of -
34,750 burden hours.
The program has also reduced the average number of hours per LEA to
submit its application from 10 hours to 9 hours due to enhancements in
the e-Application reporting system. This adjustment decreases the
burden hours by -1,264, which results in a total decrease in this
section of -36,014 burden hours.
Section 222.37
Under existing regulations, the burden estimation of hours is 900
LEAs taking 20 minutes each to report ADA for a total of 300 hours
total burden. Since the last estimation of burden hours, the number of
LEAs that are required to submit this data has reduced and will reduce
again to zero under the proposed regulations. An LEA may exercise the
option to report ADA in order to try and increase its attendance rate
above the State average. We estimate that approximately 100 LEAs may
use this option and the amount of time would be 5 minutes to report the
data as it is readily available and accessible to the LEA. The entire
estimated hours for all applicants would be an insignificant 8.3 total
hours for this component.
Section 222.40
Proposed Sec. 222.40 would require SEAs that opt to use special
additional factors for the selection of GCDs to provide a rationale
demonstrating how the special factors selected impact the cost of
education.
In the past 10 years (2006-2016) there are 14 SEAs that have used
the GCD provision. In those 10 years, only one SEA has used the special
additional factors provision. The SEA already submits the data, they
are simply now providing a very brief narrative justification. At a
maximum, this should only take 20 minutes to complete as the majority
of the work is already accounted for in the burden hour calculation. As
a result, there is essentially no increase for this provision.
Section 222.62
The burden hours associated with this activity have already been
factored into the active data collection total burden hours; there is
no increase to the burden hour calculation.
Section 222.94
The proposed regulatory provision would require LEAs claiming
children residing on Indian lands to respond in writing to comments,
recommendations, and concerns from the parents of Indian children and
tribal officials. There is an associated increase with this requirement
for the LEA. There are approximately 800 LEAs that are required to
comply with this new requirement. We estimate 1.3 hours for the
completion of this requirement, which would result in an increase of
1,040 total burden hours.
Burden Hour Estimates for the Impact Aid Section 8003 Information
Collection Package
The Impact Aid Program is extending the existing and approved 1810-
0687, and renewing its section 8003 application package with this
notice. The following charts identify the changes from the current
information collection with the proposed substantive changes to this
information collection. Some of the changes in burden hours are a
result of the proposed regulations, while others are the result of more
accurate numbers of
[[Page 81488]]
impacted LEAs and to account for system enhancements that make
reporting easier. The activities associated directly with the changes
proposed in this notice have been denoted with an asterisk. Table 1
provides a summary of the total burden hours associated with completing
an Impact Aid application. Table 2 breaks down the hours associated
with the completion of tables 1-5 of the Impact Aid application for
reporting an applicant's federally-connected children. All applicants
must complete at least one of these tables to be eligible to receive
funding. Table 3 breaks down the burden hours associated with
supplemental information that some or all Impact Aid applicants must
submit with their applications. Table 4 shows the dollar change
associated with the changes in the burden hours. For more complete
information on burden hours and the justifications, please refer to the
Information Collection Request (ICR).
Table 1--Summary of Burden Hours To Submit a Complete Impact Aid
Application Package
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated total
Total annual annual burden
By regulatory section or subsection burden hours hours under
under current the proposed
regulations regulations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34 CFR 222.35, 34 CFR 222.50-52, 139,140 103,126
Tables 1-5...........................
34 CFR 222.37, Table 6................ 1,264 100
34 CFR 222.53, Table 7................ 217 217
34 CFR 222.141-143, Table 8........... 5 5
Reporting Construction Expenditures... 40 40
Housing Official Certification Form... 13 5
Indian Policies and Procedures (IPPs). 0 187
IPP Responses. * 0 1,040
---------------------------------
Total............................. 140,679 104,720
Number of LEAs........................ 1,265 1,264
Average Hours Per LEA (total divided 111.2 82.8
by number of LEAs)...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Denotes changes directly associated with the proposed regulatory
changes.
Table 2--Reporting Numbers of Federally-Connected Children on Tables 1-5 of the Impact Aid Application
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current est. Proposed est.
Task number number Average hours Total hours Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parent-pupil surveys *......................... 500,000 355,000 0.25 88,750 Assumes 355,000 federally-connected
children identified through a survey
form completed by a parent. The number
is reduced due to new regulations
requiring source check forms for
children residing on Indian lands or
children residing on eligible low rent
housing.
Source check with Federal official to document 500 1000 3 3,000 Assumes 3 hours verify information on a
children living on Federal property (LEAs). * source check.
Collecting and organizing data to report on 1,265 1,264 9 11,376 Assumes time to complete and organize
Tables 1-5 in the Application (LEAs). survey/source check data on federally-
connected children averages nine
hours.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Current.............................. .............. .............. .............. 103,126
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Previous............................. .............. .............. .............. 139,140
Change......................................... .............. .............. .............. -36,014
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Denotes changes directly associated with the proposed regulatory changes.
Table 3--Additional Reporting Tasks and Supplemental Information on Tables 6-10 of the Impact Aid Application
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current est. Proposed est.
Task number number Average hours Total hours Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reporting enrollment and attendance data on 1,264 100 1 100 The proposed regulations would reduce
Table 6 (LEAs). * the number even further to
approximately 100 LEAs who will have a
higher attendance rate than the State
average.
[[Page 81489]]
Collecting and reporting expenditure data for 869 868 .25 217 This assumes that an average of 868
federally-connected children with disabilities LEAs received a payment for children
on Table 7 (LEAs). with disabilities in the previous year
and is required by law to report
expenditures for children with
disabilities for the prior year.
Reporting children educated in federally-owned 5 5 1 5 Assumes LEAs maintain data on children
school buildings on Table 8 (LEAs). housed in the small number of schools
owned by ED but operated by LEAs.
Reporting expenditures of Section 8007 funds on 159 159 0.25 40 Assumes that the LEAs eligible to
Table 10 (LEAs). receive these funds have ready access
to financial reports to retrieve and
report these data.
Indian Policies and Procedures (IPPs).......... 625 625 0.3 187 The LEA does not have to collect any
new information to meet this
requirement.
IPP Response *................................. 0 800 1.3 1,040 This assumes some LEAs may have to
respond to more than one tribe.
Contact Form for Housing Undergoing Renovation 10 10 0 0 The time associated is too small to
or Rebuilding. calculate (<5 minutes per applicant).
Housing Official Certification Form............ 10 10 .50 5 Amount of time for the housing official
to estimate the number of school-age
children that would have resided in
the housing had it not been
unavailable due to renovation or
rebuilding.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Current.............................. .............. .............. .............. 1,594
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Previous............................. .............. .............. .............. 1,529
Change......................................... .............. .............. .............. 65
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Denotes changes directly associated with the proposed regulatory changes.
Table 4--Estimation of Annualized Cost to Applicants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hours per Number of
Respondent response Rate ($/hour) respondents Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parent Respondents *............................ .25 10 355,000 $887,500
LEA Respondents................................. 9 15 1,264 170,640
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Cost.................................. .............. .............. .............. 1,058,140
Prior Cost Estimate............................. .............. .............. .............. 1,443,992
Cost Change..................................... .............. .............. .............. -385,852
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Denotes changes directly associated with the proposed regulatory changes.
We have prepared an ICR for these information collection
requirements. If you want to review and comment on the ICR, please
follow these instructions:
In preparing your comments you may want to review the ICR,
including the supporting materials, in www.regulations.gov by using the
Docket ID number specified in this notice. This proposed collection is
identified as proposed collection 1810-0687.
We consider your comments on this proposed collection of
information in--
Deciding whether the proposed collection is necessary for
the proper performance of our functions, including whether the
information will have practical use;
Evaluating the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection, including the validity of our methodology and
assumptions;
Enhancing the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the
information we collect; and
Minimizing the burden on those who must respond. This
includes exploring the use of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques.
Between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the
Federal Register, OMB is required to make a decision concerning the
collection of information contained in these proposed regulations.
Therefore, to ensure that OMB gives your comments full consideration,
it is important that OMB receives your comments on this ICR by January
29, 2016. This does not affect the deadline for your comments to us on
the proposed regulations.
When commenting on the ICR for these proposed regulations, please
specify the Docket ID number and indicate ``Information Collection
Comments'' on the top of your comments.
Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal
mail or delivery related to the information collection requirements
should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection
Clearance
[[Page 81490]]
Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Mailstop L-OM-2E319LBJ, Room 2E115, Washington, DC 20202-4537.
Intergovernmental Review
This program is not subject to Executive Order 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document: 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 via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can 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). To use PDF
you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the
site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at:
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number
84.041 Impact Aid)
List of Subjects in 34 CFR Part 222
Administrative practice and procedure, Education of individuals
with disabilities, Elementary and secondary education, Federally
affected areas, Grant programs--education, Indians--education,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, School construction.
Dated: December 22, 2015.
Ann Whalen,
Delegated the authority to perform the functions and duties of
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Assistant Secretary
for Elementary and Secondary Education proposes to amend part 222 of
title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 222--IMPACT AID PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for part 222 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7701-7714, unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Section 222.2 is amended in paragraph (c) by:
0
A. Revising paragraph (3)(iv) under the definition of ``Membership'',
and adding paragraph (3)(v).
0
B. Revising the definition of ``Parent employed on Federal property''.
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 222.2 What definitions apply to this part?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Membership means the following:
(3) * * *
(iv) Attend the schools of the applicant LEA under a tuition
arrangement with another LEA that is responsible for providing them a
free public education; or
(v) Reside in a State other than the State in which the LEA is
located, unless the student is covered by the provisions of--
(A) Section 8010(c) of the Act; or
(B) A formal State tuition or enrollment agreement.
* * * * *
Parent employed on Federal property. (1) The term means:
(i) An employee of the Federal Government who reports to work on,
or whose place of work is located on, Federal property, including a
federal employee who reports to an alternative duty station on the
survey date, but whose regular duty station is on Federal property.
(ii) A person not employed by the Federal Government but who spends
more than 50 percent of his or her working time on Federal property
(whether as an employee or self-employed) when engaged in farming,
grazing, lumbering, mining, or other operations that are authorized by
the Federal Government, through a lease or other arrangement, to be
carried out entirely or partly on Federal property.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (1)(ii) of this definition, the
term does not include a person who is not employed by the Federal
government and reports to work at a location not on Federal property,
even though the individual provides services to operations or
activities authorized to be carried out on Federal property.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7703)
* * * * *
Sec. 222.3 [Amended]
0
3. Section 222.3 is amended by removing the phrase ``September 30'' in
paragraph (b)(2) introductory text and adding in its place ``June 30''.
0
4. Section 222.5 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(1)
and (2) to read as follows:
Sec. 222.5 When may a local educational agency amend its application?
(a) * * *
(2) By June 30 of the Federal fiscal year preceding the fiscal year
for which the LEA seeks assistance.
(b) * * *
(1) Those data were not available at the time the LEA filed its
application and are acceptable to the Secretary; and
(2) The LEA submits a written request to the Secretary with a copy
to its SEA no later than June 30 of the Federal fiscal year preceding
the fiscal year for which the LEA seeks assistance.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 222.22 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 222.22 How does the Secretary treat compensation from Federal
activities for purposes of determining eligibility and payments?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) The LEA received revenue during the preceding fiscal year,
including payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTS or PILTs) and other
payments received from any other Federal Department or agency,
generated directly from the eligible Federal property or activities in
or on that property; and
* * * * *
0
6. Section 222.23 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 222.23 How are consolidated LEAs treated for the purposes of
eligibility and payment under section 8002?
(a) Eligibility. An LEA formed by the consolidation of one or more
LEAs is eligible for section 8002 funds, notwithstanding section
222.21(a)(1), if--
(1) The consolidation occurred prior to fiscal year 1995 or after
fiscal year 2005; and
(2) At least one of the former LEAs included in the consolidation:
(i) Was eligible for section 8002 funds in the fiscal year prior to
the consolidation; and
(ii) Currently contains Federal property that meets the
requirements of 222.21(a) within the boundaries of the former LEA or
LEAs.
(b) Documentation required. In the first year of application
following the consolidation, an LEA that meets the requirements of
paragraph (a) must submit evidence that it meets the requirements of
paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2)(ii).
(c) Basis for foundation payment. (1) The foundation payment for a
consolidated district is based on the total section 8002 payment for
the last
[[Page 81491]]
fiscal year for which the former LEA received payment. When more than
one former LEA qualifies under paragraph (a)(2), the payments for the
last fiscal year for which the former LEAs received payment are added
together to calculate the foundation basis.
(2) Consolidated LEAs receive only a foundation payment and do not
receive a payment from any remaining funds.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7702(g) and Pub. L. 113-76)
0
7. Section 222.24 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 222.24 How does a local educational agency that has multiple tax
rates for real property classifications derive a single real property
tax rate?
An LEA that has multiple tax rates for real property
classifications derives a single tax rate for the purposes of
determining its Section 8002 maximum payment by dividing the total
revenues for current expenditures it received from local real property
taxes by the total taxable value of real property located within the
boundaries of the LEA. These data are from the fiscal year prior to the
fiscal year in which the applicant seeks assistance.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7702)
0
8. Section 222.30 is amended in the definition of ``free public
education'' by revising paragraph (2)(ii) to read as follows:
Sec. 222.30 What is ``free public education''?
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) Federal funds, other than Impact Aid funds and charter school
startup funds (Title V, part B, subpart I of the Act), do not provide a
substantial portion of the educational program, in relation to other
LEAs in the State, as determined by the Secretary.
* * * * *
Sec. 222.32 [Amended]
0
9. Section 222.32 is amended in paragraph (b) by adding the phrase
``timely and complete'' after the first instance of ``its''.
0
10. Section 222.33 is amended by:
0
A. Revising the section heading.
0
B. Removing the phrase ``the first'' in paragraph (a)(1) and adding in
its place ``its''.
0
C. Adding paragraph (c).
The revision and addition reads as follows:
Sec. 222.33 When must an applicant make its membership count?
* * * * *
(c) The data resulting from the count in paragraph (b) must be
complete by the application deadline.
* * * * *
Sec. 222.34 [Removed and Reserved]
0
10. Section 222.34 is removed and reserved.
0
11. Section 222.35 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2),
adding paragraphs (a)(3) and (4), and revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 222.35 How does a local educational agency count the membership
of its federally connected children?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) The applicant shall conduct a parent-pupil survey by providing
a form to a parent of each pupil enrolled in the LEA to substantiate
the pupil's place of residence and the parent's place of employment.
(2) A parent-pupil survey form must include the following:
(i) Pupil enrollment information (this information may also be
obtained from school records), including--
(A) Name of pupil;
(B) Date of birth of the pupil; and
(C) Name of public school and grade of the pupil.
(ii) Pupil residence information, including:
(A) The complete address of the pupil's residence, or other
acceptable location information for that residence, such as a complete
legal description, a complete U.S. Geological Survey number, or
complete property tract or parcel number; and
(B) If the pupil's residence is on Federal property, the name of
the Federal facility.
(3) If any of the following circumstances apply, the parent-pupil
survey form must also include the following:
(i) If the parent is employed on Federal property, except for a
parent who is a member of the uniformed services on active duty, parent
employment information, including--
(A) Name (as it appears on the employer's payroll record) of the
parent (mother, father, legal guardian or other person standing in loco
parentis) who is employed on Federal property and with whom the pupil
resides; and
(B) Name of employer, name and complete address of the Federal
property on which the parent is employed (or other acceptable location
information, such as a complete legal description).
(ii) If the parent is a member of the uniformed services on active
duty, the name, rank, and branch of service of that parent.
(iii) If the parent is both an official of, and accredited by a
foreign government, and a foreign military officer, the name, rank, and
country of service.
(iv) If the parent is a civilian employed on a Federal vessel, the
name of the vessel, hull number, homeport, and name of the controlling
agency.
(4)(i) Every parent-pupil survey form must include the signature of
the parent supplying the information and the date of such signature,
except as provided in paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section.
(ii) An LEA may accept an unsigned parent-pupil survey form, or a
parent-pupil survey form that is signed by a person other than a
parent, only under unusual circumstances. In those instances, the
parent-pupil survey form must show why the parent did not sign the
survey form, and when, how, and from whom the residence and employment
information was obtained. Unusual circumstances may include, but are
not limited to:
(A) A pupil who, on the survey date, resided with a person without
full legal guardianship of the child while the pupil's parent or
parents were deployed for military duty. In this case, the person with
whom the child is residing may sign the parent-pupil survey form.
(B) A pupil who, on the survey date, was a ward of the juvenile
justice system. In this case, an administrator of the institution where
the pupil was held on the survey date may sign the parent-pupil survey
form.
(C) A pupil who, on the survey date, was an emancipated youth may
sign his or her own parent-pupil survey form.
(D) A pupil who, on the survey date, was at least 18 years old but
who was not past the 12th grade may sign his or her own parent-pupil
survey form.
(iii) The Department does not accept a parent pupil survey form
signed by an employee of the school district who is not the student's
mother, father, legal guardian or other person standing in loco
parentis.
(b) Source check. A source check is a type of survey tool that
groups children being claimed on the Impact Aid application by Federal
property. This form is used in lieu of the parent-pupil survey form to
substantiate a pupil's place of residence or parent's place of
employment on the survey date.
(1) A source check is required to document children residing on
Indian lands and children residing in eligible low-rent housing.
(2) The source check must include sufficient information to
determine the eligibility of the Federal property and the individual
children claimed on the form.
(3) A source check may also include:
[[Page 81492]]
(i) Certification by a parent's employer regarding the parent's
place of employment;
(ii) Certification by a military or other Federal housing official
as to the residence of each pupil claimed; or
(iii) Certification by a military personnel official regarding the
military active duty status of the parent of each pupil claimed as
active duty uniformed services.
* * * * *
0
12. Section 222.37 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) and
adding paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 222.37 How does the Secretary calculate the average daily
attendance of federally connected children?
* * * * *
(b)(1) For purposes of this section, actual ADA means raw ADA data
that have not been weighted or adjusted to reflect higher costs for
specific types of students for purposes of distributing State aid for
education.
(2) If an LEA provides a program of free public summer school,
attendance data for the summer session are included in the LEA's ADA
figure in accordance with State law or practice.
(3) An LEA's ADA count includes attendance data for children who do
not attend the LEA's schools, but for whom it makes tuition
arrangements with other educational entities.
(4) Data are not counted for any child--
(i) Who is not physically present at school for the daily minimum
time period required by the State, unless the child is--
(A) Participating via telecommunication or correspondence course
programs that meet State standards; or
(B) Being served by a State-approved homebound instruction program
for the daily minimum time period appropriate for the child; or
(ii) Attending the applicant's schools under a tuition arrangement
with another LEA.
(c) An LEA may calculate its average daily attendance calculation
in one of the following ways:
(1) If an LEA is in a State that collects actual ADA data for
purposes of distributing State aid for education, the Secretary
calculates the ADA of that LEA's federally connected children for the
current fiscal year payment as follows:
(i) By dividing the ADA of all the LEA's children for the second
preceding fiscal year by the LEA's total membership on its survey date
for the second preceding fiscal year (or, in the case of an LEA that
conducted two membership counts in the second preceding fiscal year, by
the average of the LEA's total membership on the two survey dates); and
(ii) By multiplying the figure determined in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A)
of this section by the LEA's total membership of federally connected
children in each subcategory described in section 8003 and claimed in
the LEA's application for the current fiscal year payment.
(2) An LEA may submit its total preceding year average daily
attendance data. The Secretary uses these data to calculate the ADA of
the LEA's federally connected children by--
(i) Dividing the LEA's preceding year's total ADA data by the
preceding year's total membership data; and
(ii) Multiplying the figure determined in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of
this section by the LEA's total membership of federally connected
children as described in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(B) of this section.
(3) An LEA may submit attendance data based on sampling conducted
during the previous fiscal year.
(i) The sampling must include attendance data for all children for
at least 30 school days.
(ii) The data must be collected during at least three periods
evenly distributed throughout the school year.
(iii) Each collection period must consist of at least five
consecutive school days.
(iv) The Secretary uses these data to calculate the ADA of the
LEA's federally connected children by--
(A) Determining the ADA of all children in the sample;
(B) Dividing the figure obtained in paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(A) of this
section by the LEA's total membership for the previous fiscal year; and
(C) Multiplying the figure determined in paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(B) of
this section by the LEA's total membership of federally connected
children for the current fiscal year, as described in paragraph
(c)(1)(i)(B) of this section.
(d) An SEA may submit data to calculate the average daily
attendance calculation for the LEAs in that State in one of the
following ways:
(1) If the SEA distributes State aid for education based on data
similar to attendance data, the SEA may request that the Secretary use
those data to calculate the ADA of each LEA's federally connected
children. If the Secretary determines that those data are, in effect,
equivalent to attendance data, the Secretary allows use of the
requested data and determines the method by which the ADA for all of
the LEA's federally connected children will be calculated.
(2) An SEA may submit data necessary for the Secretary to calculate
a State average attendance ratio for all LEAs in the State by
submitting the total ADA and total membership data for the State for
each of the last three most recent fiscal years that ADA data were
collected. The Secretary uses these data to calculate the ADA of the
federally connected children for each LEA in the State by--
(i)(A) Dividing the total ADA data by the total membership data for
each of the three fiscal years and averaging the results; and
(B) Multiplying the average determined in paragraph (d)(2)(i)(A) of
this section by the LEA's total membership of federally connected
children as described in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(B) of this section.
(e) The Secretary may calculate a State average attendance ratio in
States with LEAs that would benefit from such calculation by using the
methodology in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section.
* * * * *
0
13. Section 222.40 is amended in paragraph (d)(1)(i) by adding the
phrase ``or density'' after the word ``sparsity'' and by adding
paragraph (d)(1)(iii).
The addition reads as follows:
Sec. 222.40 What procedures does a State educational agency use for
certain local educational agencies to determine generally comparable
local educational agencies using additional factors, for local
contribution rate purposes?
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) The SEA must submit its rationale for selecting the
additional factors and describe how they affect the cost of education
in the LEA.
* * * * *
0
14. Section 222.62 is amended:
0
A. By redesignating paragraphs (a) and (b) as paragraphs (b) and (c),
respectively.
0
B. By adding a new paragraph (a).
0
C. In newly redesignated paragraph (b), by removing the phrase ``an
additional assistance payment under section 8003(f)'' and adding in its
place ``a heavily impacted payment''.
0
D. In newly redesignated paragraph (c), by removing the phrase ``an
additional assistance payment under section 8003(f)'' and adding in its
place ``a heavily impacted payment''.
The addition reads as follows:
[[Page 81493]]
Sec. 222.62 How are local educational agencies determined eligible
under section 8003(b)(2)?
(a) An applicant that wishes to be considered to receive a heavily
impacted payment must submit the required information indicating
eligibility under Sec. Sec. 222.63 or 222.64 with the annual section
8003 Impact Aid application.
* * * * *
0
15. Section 222.91 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 222.91 What requirements must a local educational agency meet to
receive a payment under section 8003 of the Act for children residing
on Indian lands?
(a) To receive a payment under section 8003 of the Act for children
residing on Indian lands, a local educational agency (LEA) must--
(1) Meet the application and eligibility requirements in section
8003 and subparts A and C of these regulations;
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b), develop and implement
policies and procedures in accordance with Sec. 222.94; and
(3) Include in its application for payments under section 8003--
(i) An assurance that the LEA established these policies and
procedures in consultation with and based on information from tribal
officials and parents of those children residing on Indian lands who
are Indian children, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this
section;
(ii) An assurance that the LEA has provided a written response to
the comments, concerns and recommendations received through the Indian
policy and procedures consultation process, except as provided in
paragraph (b) of this section; and
(iii) Either a copy of the policies and procedures, or
documentation that the LEA has received a waiver in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) An LEA is not required to comply with Sec. 222.94 with respect
to students from a tribe that has provided the LEA with a waiver that
meets the requirements of this paragraph.
(1) A waiver must contain a voluntary written statement from an
appropriate tribal official or tribal governing body that--
(i) The LEA need not comply with Sec. 222.94 because the tribe is
satisfied with the LEA's provision of educational services to the
tribe's students; and
(ii) The tribe was provided a copy of the requirements in Sec.
222.91 and Sec. 222.94, and understands the requirements that are
being waived.
(2) The LEA must submit the waiver at the time of application.
(3) The LEA must obtain a waiver from each tribe that has Indian
children living on Indian lands claimed by the LEA on its application
under section 8003 of the Act. If the LEA only obtains waivers from
some, but not all, applicable tribes, the LEA must comply with the
requirements of Sec. 222.94 with respect to those tribes that did not
agree to waive these requirements.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7703(a), 7704)
0
16. Section 222.94 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 222.94 What are the responsibilities of the LEA with regard to
Indian policies and procedures?
(a) An LEA that is subject to the requirements of Sec. 222.91(a)
must consult with and involve local tribal officials and parents of
Indian children in the planning and development of:
(1) Its Indian policies and procedures (IPPs), and
(2) The LEA's general educational program and activities.
(b) An LEA's IPPs must include a description of the specific
procedures for how the LEA will:
(1) Disseminate relevant applications, evaluations, program plans
and information related to the LEA's education program and activities
with sufficient advance notice to allow tribes and parents of Indian
children the opportunity to review and make recommendations.
(2) Provide an opportunity for tribes and parents of Indian
children to provide their views on the LEA's educational program and
activities, including recommendations on the needs of their children
and on how the LEA may help those children realize the benefits of the
LEA's education programs and activities. As part of this requirement,
the LEA will--
(i) Notify tribes and the parents of Indian children of the
opportunity to submit comments and recommendations, considering the
tribe's preference for method of communication, and
(ii) Modify the method of and time for soliciting Indian views, if
necessary, to ensure the maximum participation of tribes and parents of
Indian children.
(3) At least annually, assess the extent to which Indian children
participate on an equal basis with non-Indian children in the LEA's
education program and activities. As part of this requirement, the LEA
will:
(i) Share relevant information related to Indian children's
participation in the LEA's education program and activities with tribes
and parents of Indian children; and
(ii) Allow tribes and parents of Indian children the opportunity
and time to review and comment on whether Indian children participate
on an equal basis with non-Indian children.
(4) Modify the IPPs if necessary, based upon the results of any
assessment or input described in paragraph (b) of this section.
(5) Respond at least annually in writing to comments and
recommendations made by tribes or parents of Indian children, and
disseminate the responses to the tribe and parents of Indian children
prior to the submission of the IPPs by the LEA.
(6) Provide a copy of the IPPs annually to the affected tribe or
tribes.
(c)(1) An LEA that is subject to the requirements of Sec.
222.91(a) must implement the IPPs described in paragraph (b) of this
section.
(2) Each LEA that has developed IPPs shall review those IPPs
annually to ensure that they comply with the provisions of this
section, and are implemented by the LEA in accordance with this
section.
(3) If an LEA determines, after input from the tribe and parents of
Indian children, that its IPPs do not meet the requirements of this
section, the LEA shall amend its IPPs to conform with those
requirements within 90 days of its determination.
(4) An LEA that amends its IPPs shall, within 30 days, send a copy
of the amended IPPs to--
(i) The Impact Aid Program Director for approval; and
(ii) The affected tribe or tribes.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7704)
Sec. 222.95 [Amended]
0
17. Section 222.95 is amended:
0
A. In paragraph (c), by removing the number ``60'' and adding in its
place ``90''.
0
B. In paragraph (d), by adding the phrase ``or part of the'' after the
word ``all''.
0
C. By removing paragraphs (e), (f), and (g).
0
18. Section 222.161 is amended by:
0
A. Adding the phrase ``Except as provided in paragraph (a)(6),'' to the
beginning of paragraph (a)(5) and lowercasing the word ``A''.
0
B. Adding paragraphs (a)(6) and (b)(3).
0
C. Revising paragraph (c).
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 222.161 How is State aid treated under section 8009 of the Act?
(a) * * *
(6)(i) If the Secretary has not made a determination 30 days before
the
[[Page 81494]]
beginning of the State's fiscal year, the State may request permission
from the Secretary to make estimated or preliminary State aid payments
that consider a portion of Impact Aid payments as local resources in
accordance with this section.
(ii) The State must include with its request an assurance that if
the Secretary determines that the State does not meet the requirements
of section 222.162 for that State fiscal year, the State must pay to
each affected LEA, within 60 days of the Secretary's determination, the
amount by which the State reduced State aid to the LEA.
(iii) In determining whether to grant permission, the Secretary may
consider factors including whether--
(A) The Secretary certified the State under Sec. 222.162 in the
prior State fiscal year; and
(B) Substantially the same State aid program is in effect since the
date of the last certification.
(b) * * *
(3) For a State that has not previously been certified by the
Secretary under Sec. 222.162, or if the last certification was more
than two years prior, the State submits projected data showing whether
it meets the disparity standard in Sec. 222.162. The projected data
must show the resulting amounts of State aid as if the State were
certified to consider Impact Aid in making State aid payments.
(c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this subpart:
Current expenditures is defined in section 8013(4) of the Act.
Additionally, for the purposes of this section it does not include
expenditures of funds received by the agency under sections 8002 and
8003(b) (including hold harmless payments calculated under section
8003(e)) that are not taken into consideration under the State aid
program and exceed the proportion of those funds that the State would
be allowed to take into consideration under Sec. 222.162.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7709)
0
19. Section 222.162 is amended:
0
A. In paragraph (c)(2) introductory text, by removing the phrase ``on
those bases'' in the first sentence and adding in its place ``using one
of the methods in paragraph (d)''.
0
B. Revising paragraph (d).
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 222.162 What disparity standard must a State meet in order to be
certified and how are disparities in current expenditures or revenues
per pupil measured?
* * * * *
(d) Accounting for Special Cost Differentials. In computing per-
pupil figures under paragraph (c) of this section, the State accounts
for special cost differentials that meet the requirements of paragraph
(c)(2) of this section in one of four ways:
(1) The Inclusion Method on a Revenue Basis. The State divides
total revenues by a weighted pupil count that includes only those
weights associated with the special cost differentials.
(2) The Inclusion Method on an Expenditure Basis. The State divides
total current expenditures by a weighted pupil count that includes only
those weights associated with the special cost differentials.
(3) The Exclusion Method on a Revenue Basis. The State subtracts
revenues associated with the special cost differentials from total
revenues, and divides this net amount by an unweighted pupil count.
(4) The Exclusion Method on an Expenditure Basis. The State
subtracts current expenditures that come from revenues associated with
the special cost differentials from total current expenditures, and
divides this net amount by an unweighted pupil count.
* * * * *
0
20. Section 222.164 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 222.164 What procedures does the Secretary follow in making a
determination under section 8009?
(a) * * *
(2) Whenever a proceeding under this subpart is initiated, the
party initiating the proceeding shall provide either the State or all
LEAs with a complete copy of the submission required in paragraph (b)
of this section. Following receipt of the submission, the Secretary
shall notify the State and all LEAs in the State of their right to
request from the Secretary, within 30 days of the initiation of a
proceeding, the opportunity to present their views to the Secretary
before the Secretary makes a determination.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-32618 Filed 12-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P