Definitions and Selection Criteria That Apply to Direct Grant Programs, 18419-18421 [2018-08965]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
18419
TABLE 165.918—Continued
[Datum NAD 1983]
Event
Location
(13) Bay Harbor Yacht Club Fourth
of July Celebration Fireworks;
Petoskey, MI.
All U.S. navigable waters of Lake Michigan and Bay Harbor Lake
within the arc of a circle with an approximate 750-foot radius from
the fireworks launch site located on a barge in position 45°21′50″
N, 085°01′37″ W.
All U.S. navigable waters of Lake Michigan and Petoskey Harbor, in
the vicinity of Bay Front Park, within the arc of a circle with an approximate 1200-foot radius from the fireworks launch site located in
position 45°22′40″ N, 084°57′30″ W.
All U.S. navigable waters of Lake Charlevoix, in the vicinity of Veterans Park, within the arc of a circle with an approximate 1400-foot
radius from the fireworks launch site located in position 45°13′30″
N, 085°01′40″ W.
All U.S. navigable waters of Lake Huron within an approximate 1000foot radius of the fireworks launch site located near the end of
Mason Street, South of State Avenue, at position 45°02′42″ N,
083°26′48″ W.
All U.S. navigable waters of the West Arm of Grand Traverse Bay
within the arc of a circle with an approximate 1200-foot radius from
the fireworks launch site located on a barge in position 44°46′12″
N, 085°37′06″ W.
All U.S. navigable waters of Lake Charlevoix, in the vicinity of Depot
Beach, within the arc of a circle with an approximate 1200-foot radius from the fireworks launch site located on a barge in position
45°19′08″ N, 085°14′18″ W.
All U.S. navigable waters of Round Lake within the arc of a circle
with an approximate 500-foot radius from the fireworks launch site
located on a barge in position 45°19′03″ N, 085°15′18″ W.
All U.S. navigable waters within the arc of a circle with an approximate 750-foot radius from the fireworks launch site located on a
barge in position 44°54′6.95″ N, 85°25′3.11″ W.
All U.S. navigable waters within the arc of a circle with an approximate 750-foot radius from the fireworks launch site located near
Harbor View Road in position 45°25′04.72″ N, 83°47′51.21″ W.
(14) Petoskey Fourth of July Celebration Fireworks; Petoskey, MI.
(15) Boyne City Fourth of July
Celebration Fireworks; Boyne
City, MI.
(16) Alpena Fourth of July Celebration Fireworks; Alpena, MI.
(17) Traverse City Fourth of July
Celebration Fireworks; Traverse
City, MI.
(18) Charlevoix Venetian Festival
Friday
Night
Fireworks;
Charlevoix, MI.
(19) Charlevoix Venetian Saturday
Night Fireworks; Charlevoix, MI.
(20) Elk Rapids Harbor Days Fireworks; Elk Rapids, MI.
(21) Nautical City Fireworks; Rogers City.
Dated: April 23, 2018.
M.R. Broz,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Sault Sainte Marie.
omitted and removing an outdated
definition.
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Parts 75 and 77
RIN 1855–AA13
Definitions and Selection Criteria That
Apply to Direct Grant Programs
Department of Education.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
13:07 Apr 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Final Regulatory Changes
On July 31, 2017, the
Department of Education (Department)
issued a new rule in order to better align
the Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR)
with the definition of ‘‘evidence-based’’
in the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, as amended by the Every
Student Succeeds Act (ESEA). Through
this document, we are adding a
selection factor that was inadvertently
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Effective date: These regulations
are effective April 27, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kelly Terpak, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 4W312, Washington, DC 20202–
5900. Telephone: (202) 205–5231 or by
email: kelly.terpak@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) or text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877–
8339.
DATES:
[FR Doc. 2018–08840 Filed 4–26–18; 8:45 am]
SUMMARY:
Event date
Background: On July 31, 2017, the
Department published in the Federal
Register a final rule (82 FR 35445) (2017
Rule) revising 34 CFR parts 75 and 77
to better align the regulations with the
definition of ‘‘evidence-based’’ in the
ESEA. In that rule, we inadvertently
removed a selection factor and
maintained an outdated definition.
Therefore, the purpose of this document
is to amend §§ 75.210(h) and 77.1(c) in
order to correct those errors.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
On or around July 4th.
On or around July 4th.
On or around July 4th.
On or around July 4th.
On or around July 4th.
This event historically occurs in
late July.
This event historically occurs in
late July.
This event historically occurs in
early August.
Early August.
34 CFR Part 75
Section 75.210
Criteria
General Selection
Current Regulations: Section
75.210(h) includes 13 factors under the
‘‘Quality of the Project Evaluation’’
selection criterion.
Final Regulations and Reasons: We
are reinserting the selection factor under
the ‘‘Quality of the Project Evaluation’’
criterion (§ 75.210(h)) focused on the
extent to which the methods of
evaluation will provide valid and
reliable performance data on relevant
outcomes. This factor was inadvertently
omitted from § 77.210(h), and we are
making this revision to add it back in.
We believe this factor continues to be an
important one to include in the menu of
selection criteria and factors available
for use in discretionary grant programs.
As noted in the 2017 Rule, the final
regulations do not change the way the
Secretary uses selection criteria and
factors. The Secretary will continue to
use selection criteria that are consistent
with the purpose of the program and
permitted under the applicable statutes
and regulations.
E:\FR\FM\27APR1.SGM
27APR1
18420
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
34 CFR Part 77
Section 77.1 Definitions That Apply to
All Department Programs
Current Regulations: Section 77.1(c)
establishes definitions that, unless a
statute or regulation provides otherwise,
apply to the regulations in title 34 of the
Code of Federal Regulations and can be
used in Department grant competitions.
Final Regulations and Reasons: We
are removing the term ‘‘randomized
controlled trial’’ from § 77.1(c). We are
removing this definition because, as
noted in the 2017 Rule, it was our intent
to replace it with the term
‘‘experimental study,’’ to align with the
definition of ‘‘evidence-based,’’ in
section 8101(21), specifically with
regard to ‘‘strong evidence.’’ In the new
definition of ‘‘strong evidence,’’ we
clarified the types of studies that can
qualify as experimental studies—
including, but not limited to,
randomized controlled trials—as
provided in the applicable What Works
Clearinghouse (WWC) Handbook.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking and
Delayed Effective Date
Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553), the
Department generally offers interested
parties the opportunity to comment on
proposed regulations. However, these
regulations make technical changes only
and do not establish substantive policy.
The regulations are, therefore, exempt
from notice and comment rulemaking
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
The APA also generally requires that
regulations be published at least 30 days
before their effective date, unless the
agency has good cause to implement its
regulations sooner (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)).
Again, because these final regulations
are merely technical, there is good cause
to make them effective on the day they
are published.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
13771 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:07 Apr 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
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 final regulatory action is not a
significant regulatory action subject to
review by OMB under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866.
Under Executive Order 13771, for
each new regulation that the
Department proposes for notice and
comment or otherwise promulgates that
is a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866 and that imposes
total costs greater than zero, it must
identify two deregulatory actions. For
Fiscal Year 2018, any new incremental
costs associated with a new regulation
must be fully offset by the elimination
of existing costs through deregulatory
actions. However, Executive Order
13771 does not apply to ‘‘transfer rules’’
that cause only income transfers
between taxpayers and program
beneficiaries, such as those regarding
discretionary grant programs. The final
regulations pertain to the Department’s
discretionary grant programs and,
therefore, Executive Order 13771 is not
applicable.
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
on 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
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 final regulations
only on a reasoned determination that
their benefits justify their costs. In
choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Based on an analysis of anticipated
costs and benefits, the Department
believes that these final regulations are
consistent with the principles in
Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this
regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
Potential Costs and Benefits
Under Executive Order 12866, we
have assessed the potential costs and
benefits of this regulatory action and
have determined that these regulations
would not impose additional costs. We
believe any additional costs imposed by
these final regulations will be negligible,
primarily because they reflect technical
changes that do not impose additional
burden. Moreover, we believe any costs
will be significantly outweighed by the
potential benefits of making necessary
clarifications and ensuring consistency
among the Education Department
General Administrative Regulations and
section 8101(21) of ESEA, as amended
by the ESSA.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that these
regulations do not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
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 program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
E:\FR\FM\27APR1.SGM
27APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. You may access the official
edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations 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 Portable Document Format
(PDF). To use PDF, you must have
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at this 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.
List of Subjects
34 CFR Part 77
Education, Grant programs—
education, Incorporation by reference.
Dated: April 24, 2018.
Betsy DeVos,
Secretary of Education.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Secretary amends parts 75
and 77 of title 34 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 75—DIRECT GRANT
PROGRAMS
1. The authority citation for part 75
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e–3 and 3474,
unless otherwise noted.
2. Section 75.210 is amended by
adding paragraph (h)(2)(xiv) to read as
follows:
■
General selection criteria.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(2) * * *
(xiv) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation will provide valid and
reliable performance data on relevant
outcomes.
*
*
*
*
*
13:07 Apr 26, 2018
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e–3 and 3474,
unless otherwise noted.
§ 77.1
[Amended]
4. Section 77.1(c) is amended by
removing the definition of ‘‘randomized
controlled trial.’’
■
[FR Doc. 2018–08965 Filed 4–26–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 8
RIN 2900–AQ03
Eligibility for Supplemental ServiceDisabled Veterans’ Insurance
ACTION:
Accounting, Copyright, Education,
Grant programs—education, Inventions
and patents, Private schools, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Youth
organizations.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
3. The authority citation for part 77
continues to read as follows:
■
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
34 CFR Part 75
§ 75.210
PART 77—DEFINITIONS THAT APPLY
TO DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS
Jkt 244001
The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA), in this final rule, amends
its regulations governing the ServiceDisabled Veterans’ Insurance (S–DVI)
program in order to explain that a
person who was granted S–DVI as of the
date of death is not eligible for
supplemental S–DVI because the
insured’s total disability did not begin
after the date of the insured’s
application for insurance and while the
insurance was in force under premiumpaying conditions.
DATES: This rule is effective May 29,
2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Weaver, Department of Veterans Affairs
Insurance Center (310/290B), 5000
Wissahickon Avenue, Philadelphia, PA
19144, (215) 842–2000, ext. 4263 (this is
not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August
23, 2017, VA published a proposed rule
in the Federal Register (82 FR 39974).
VA provided a 60-day comment period
on the proposed rule, which ended on
October 23, 2017. VA received
comments from five individuals. The
commenters stated that they believed
the proposed rule would unnecessarily
restrict eligibility for supplemental S–
DVI; eliminate insurance coverage for
veterans; and is contrary to the
congressional intent of the
supplemental S–DVI legislation. We
address their contentions below.
SUMMARY:
A. Insurance Coverage
One commenter stated that the rule
would eliminate insurance coverage for
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18421
many veterans. The regulation does not
eliminate insurance coverage for
insured veterans or those eligible to be
insured under supplemental S–DVI.
Rather, the rule clarifies VA’s
longstanding practice, which is dictated
by 38 U.S.C. 1912(a) and 1922A(a), by
explaining which veterans are ineligible
for supplemental S–DVI consistent with
the governing statutes. See Martin v.
Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 451 (2014).
Therefore, VA will not make any
changes based on this comment.
B. Eligibility for Supplemental S–DVI
Four commenters stated that the rule
would restrict eligibility for
supplemental S–DVI. Two of the
commenters stated that the rule makes
a blanket assessment that a mentally
incompetent veteran is ineligible for
supplemental S–DVI based on the
assumption that the veteran would not
have applied for the coverage. Another
commenter stated that the rule
discriminates against veterans who are
incapable of applying for supplemental
S–DVI prior to their date of death.
The rule is not based upon any
assumption nor does it discriminate
against certain veterans. As VA
explained in the proposed rule, under
38 U.S.C. 1922A(a), a S–DVI insured is
not entitled to supplemental S–DVI
unless the insured qualifies for waiver
of premiums under 38 U.S.C. 1912(a),
and a veteran granted insurance under
38 U.S.C. 1922(b) cannot qualify for a
waiver of premiums under § 1912(a)
because the insured’s total disability
does not begin after the date of the
insured’s application for insurance and
while the insurance is in force under
premium-paying conditions. See 82 FR
39975. While section 1922(b) grants S–
DVI posthumously, Congress did not
include provisions in section 1922A to
grant supplemental S–DVI to the
survivors of veterans who were unable
to apply for the insurance prior to death.
See Martin, 26 Vet. App. at 458–59. VA
will not make any changes based on
these comments.
Two commenters stated that VA
should revise the rule to prevent abuses
rather than to eliminate eligibility for
Supplemental S–DVI for all veterans
granted S–DVI under section 1922(b).
Both commenters stated that the point
of the Martin decision was to prevent
abuse of the system. We see no reference
in the court’s decision for prevention of
abuse. Rather, the court’s holdings are
based on the plain language of the
statutes. See 26 Vet. App. 458–49. Any
VA rule that is inconsistent with the
statutes would be invalid. We therefore
decline to make any changes to the rule
on this basis.
E:\FR\FM\27APR1.SGM
27APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 82 (Friday, April 27, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18419-18421]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08965]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Parts 75 and 77
RIN 1855-AA13
Definitions and Selection Criteria That Apply to Direct Grant
Programs
AGENCY: Department of Education.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 31, 2017, the Department of Education (Department)
issued a new rule in order to better align the Education Department
General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) with the definition of
``evidence-based'' in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as
amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESEA). Through this
document, we are adding a selection factor that was inadvertently
omitted and removing an outdated definition.
DATES: Effective date: These regulations are effective April 27, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Terpak, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 4W312, Washington, DC 20202-
5900. Telephone: (202) 205-5231 or by email: [email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Final Regulatory Changes
Background: On July 31, 2017, the Department published in the
Federal Register a final rule (82 FR 35445) (2017 Rule) revising 34 CFR
parts 75 and 77 to better align the regulations with the definition of
``evidence-based'' in the ESEA. In that rule, we inadvertently removed
a selection factor and maintained an outdated definition. Therefore,
the purpose of this document is to amend Sec. Sec. 75.210(h) and
77.1(c) in order to correct those errors.
34 CFR Part 75
Section 75.210 General Selection Criteria
Current Regulations: Section 75.210(h) includes 13 factors under
the ``Quality of the Project Evaluation'' selection criterion.
Final Regulations and Reasons: We are reinserting the selection
factor under the ``Quality of the Project Evaluation'' criterion (Sec.
75.210(h)) focused on the extent to which the methods of evaluation
will provide valid and reliable performance data on relevant outcomes.
This factor was inadvertently omitted from Sec. 77.210(h), and we are
making this revision to add it back in. We believe this factor
continues to be an important one to include in the menu of selection
criteria and factors available for use in discretionary grant programs.
As noted in the 2017 Rule, the final regulations do not change the way
the Secretary uses selection criteria and factors. The Secretary will
continue to use selection criteria that are consistent with the purpose
of the program and permitted under the applicable statutes and
regulations.
[[Page 18420]]
34 CFR Part 77
Section 77.1 Definitions That Apply to All Department Programs
Current Regulations: Section 77.1(c) establishes definitions that,
unless a statute or regulation provides otherwise, apply to the
regulations in title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations and can be
used in Department grant competitions.
Final Regulations and Reasons: We are removing the term
``randomized controlled trial'' from Sec. 77.1(c). We are removing
this definition because, as noted in the 2017 Rule, it was our intent
to replace it with the term ``experimental study,'' to align with the
definition of ``evidence-based,'' in section 8101(21), specifically
with regard to ``strong evidence.'' In the new definition of ``strong
evidence,'' we clarified the types of studies that can qualify as
experimental studies--including, but not limited to, randomized
controlled trials--as provided in the applicable What Works
Clearinghouse (WWC) Handbook.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking and Delayed Effective Date
Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553), the
Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to
comment on proposed regulations. However, these regulations make
technical changes only and do not establish substantive policy. The
regulations are, therefore, exempt from notice and comment rulemaking
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
The APA also generally requires that regulations be published at
least 30 days before their effective date, unless the agency has good
cause to implement its regulations sooner (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)). Again,
because these final regulations are merely technical, there is good
cause to make them effective on the day they are published.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 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 final regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Under Executive Order 13771, for each new regulation that the
Department proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates
that is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and
that imposes total costs greater than zero, it must identify two
deregulatory actions. For Fiscal Year 2018, any new incremental costs
associated with a new regulation must be fully offset by the
elimination of existing costs through deregulatory actions. However,
Executive Order 13771 does not apply to ``transfer rules'' that cause
only income transfers between taxpayers and program beneficiaries, such
as those regarding discretionary grant programs. The final regulations
pertain to the Department's discretionary grant programs and,
therefore, Executive Order 13771 is not applicable.
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 on 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 final regulations only on a reasoned
determination that their benefits justify their costs. In choosing
among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches
that maximize net benefits. Based on an analysis of anticipated costs
and benefits, the Department believes that these final regulations are
consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the exercise of
their governmental functions.
Potential Costs and Benefits
Under Executive Order 12866, we have assessed the potential costs
and benefits of this regulatory action and have determined that these
regulations would not impose additional costs. We believe any
additional costs imposed by these final regulations will be negligible,
primarily because they reflect technical changes that do not impose
additional burden. Moreover, we believe any costs will be significantly
outweighed by the potential benefits of making necessary clarifications
and ensuring consistency among the Education Department General
Administrative Regulations and section 8101(21) of ESEA, as amended by
the ESSA.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that these regulations do not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
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 program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
[[Page 18421]]
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
Federal Regulations 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 Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must have Adobe
Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this 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.
List of Subjects
34 CFR Part 75
Accounting, Copyright, Education, Grant programs--education,
Inventions and patents, Private schools, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Youth organizations.
34 CFR Part 77
Education, Grant programs--education, Incorporation by reference.
Dated: April 24, 2018.
Betsy DeVos,
Secretary of Education.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Secretary amends
parts 75 and 77 of title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 75--DIRECT GRANT PROGRAMS
0
1. The authority citation for part 75 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474, unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Section 75.210 is amended by adding paragraph (h)(2)(xiv) to read as
follows:
Sec. 75.210 General selection criteria.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(2) * * *
(xiv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
valid and reliable performance data on relevant outcomes.
* * * * *
PART 77--DEFINITIONS THAT APPLY TO DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS
0
3. The authority citation for part 77 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 77.1 [Amended]
0
4. Section 77.1(c) is amended by removing the definition of
``randomized controlled trial.''
[FR Doc. 2018-08965 Filed 4-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P