Proposed Requirements-The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Paperwork Reduction Waivers, 34554-34559 [2020-11416]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
34554
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 109 / Friday, June 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
governmental jurisdiction (locality with
fewer than 50,000 people).
The proposed rule will apply to all
customs brokers, regardless of size.
Accordingly, the proposed rule will
affect a substantial number of small
entities. However, as stated above in the
Executive Orders 13563, 12866, and
13771 section, the proposed rule will
result in an average savings per customs
broker of a discounted present value of
$560. Since brokers, on average, will
benefit as a result of this rule, and the
savings are relatively small on a per
broker basis, it will not have a
significant impact on customs brokers.
Accordingly, CBP certifies that this rule
does not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
5. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13,
44 U.S.C. 3507) an agency may not
conduct, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless the collection of information
displays a valid control number
assigned by OMB. The collections of
information contained in these
regulations are provided for by OMB
control number 1651–0034 (CBP
Regulations Pertaining to Customs
Brokers) and by OMB control number
1651–0076 (Recordkeeping
Requirements). This rule does not
change the burden under these
information collections.
Signing Authority
This regulation is being issued in
accordance with 19 CFR 0.1(a)(1)
pertaining to the Secretary of the
Treasury’s authority (or that of his
delegate) to approve regulations related
to certain customs revenue functions.
List of Subjects
19 CFR Part 24
Accounting, Claims, Customs duties
and inspection, Harbors, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Taxes.
19 CFR Part 111
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Proposed Amendments to the CBP
Regulations
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, parts 24 and 111 of title 19 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR
parts 24 and 111) are proposed to be
amended as set forth below.
17:12 Jun 04, 2020
1. The general authority citation for
part 24 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 58a–
58c, 66, 1202 (General Note 3(i), Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States), 1505,
1520, 1624; 26 U.S.C. 4461, 4462; 31 U.S.C.
3717, 9701; Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135
(6 U.S.C. 1 et seq.).
*
*
§ 24.22
*
*
*
[Amended]
2. In § 24.22:
a. Paragraph (h) is amended by:
i. Removing the phrase ‘‘each district
permit and for’’ in the first sentence;
■ ii. Removing the second sentence; and
■ iii. Removing the word ‘‘port’’ from
the third sentence and adding in its
place the words ‘‘designated Center’’;
and
■ b. Paragraph (i)(9) is amended by
removing the phrase ‘‘: for district
permits, class code 497;’’ from the first
sentence.
■
■
■
PART 111—CUSTOMS BROKERS
3. The authority citation for part 111
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202 (General
Note 3(i), Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States), 1624; 1641.
Section 111.2 also issued under 19 U.S.C.
1484, 1498;
Section 111.96 also issued under 19 U.S.C.
58c, 31 U.S.C. 9701.
Jkt 250001
the designated Center referred to in
§ 111.19(b). The permit user fee must be
paid by the due date as published
annually in the Federal Register, and
must be remitted in accordance with the
procedures set forth in § 24.22(i) of this
chapter. When a broker submits an
application for a national permit under
§ 111.19(b), the full permit user fee must
be remitted with the application,
regardless of the point during the
calendar year at which the application
is submitted. If a broker fails to pay the
annual permit user fee by the published
due date, the permit is revoked by
operation of law. The director of the
designated Center will notify the broker
in writing of the failure to pay and the
revocation of the permit.
*
*
*
*
*
Approved: March 3, 2020.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Department of
the Treasury.
Mark A. Morgan,
Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection.
[FR Doc. 2020–04708 Filed 6–4–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter III
[Docket ID ED–2020–OSERS–0015]
4. In § 111.19, revise the section
heading and paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Proposed Requirements—The
Individuals With Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA) Paperwork Reduction
Waivers
§ 111.19
AGENCY:
■
National permit.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Fees. A national permit issued
under paragraph (a) of this section is
subject to the permit application fee
specified in § 111.96(b) and to the
customs user permit fee specified in
§ 111.96 (c). The fees must be paid at the
designated Center (see § 111.1) or online
with the submission of the permit
application.
*
*
*
*
*
5. In § 111.96, paragraph (c) is revised
to read as follows:
■
Administrative practice and
procedure, Brokers, Customs duties and
inspection, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
PART 24—CUSTOMS FINANCIAL AND
ACCOUNTING PROCEDURE
§ 111.96
Fees.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Permit user fee. Payment of an
annual permit user fee defined in
§ 24.22(h) of this chapter is required for
a national permit granted to an
individual, partnership, association, or
corporate broker. The permit user fee is
payable with the filing of an application
for a national permit under § 111.19(b),
and for each subsequent calendar year at
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Proposed requirements and
definition.
The Department of Education
(Department) proposes requirements
and a definition for waivers under
section 609 of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The
Department may select as many as 15
States to receive waivers of statutory
requirements of, or regulatory
requirements relating to, IDEA Part B,
for a period of time not to exceed 4
years, to reduce excessive paperwork
and noninstructional time burdens that
do not assist in improving educational
and functional results for children with
disabilities. The purpose of these
waivers is to increase the time and
resources available for instruction and
other activities aimed at improving
educational and functional results for
children with disabilities. Statutory
requirements of, or regulatory
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05JNP1.SGM
05JNP1
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 109 / Friday, June 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
requirements relating to, applicable civil
rights requirements or procedural
safeguards under section 615 of IDEA
may not be waived. The Department
may use these proposed requirements
and definition in fiscal year (FY) 2020
and later years.
DATES: We must receive your comments
on or before August 19, 2020.
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 ‘‘Help.’’
• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery,
or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver
your comments about these proposed
requirements, address them to David
Egnor, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5163,
Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC
20202–5076.
Privacy Note: The Department’s
policy is to make all comments received
from members of the public 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:
David Egnor, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 5163, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202–5076.
Telephone: (202) 245–7334. Email:
David.Egnor@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 the
proposed requirements and definition.
To ensure that your comments have
maximum effect in developing the final
requirements and definition, we urge
you to identify clearly the specific
section of the proposed requirements or
definition that each comment addresses.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:12 Jun 04, 2020
Jkt 250001
We invite you to assist us in
complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders
12866, 13563, and 13771 and their
overall requirement of reducing
regulatory burden that might result from
these proposed requirements and
definition. 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 program.
Directed Questions
1. We invite public comment on
whether there are other specific issues
the Department should consider when
evaluating waiver proposals and
whether we should require States, in
their proposals, to provide further
explanations of the legal and researchbased supports for their proposals.
2. The Department’s regulations
implementing Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504)
and covering recipients that serve
school-aged children with disabilities,
as set out in 34 CFR 104.31 through
104.36, contain civil rights protections
that often overlap with, or can be met
through the implementation of, the
protections in IDEA Part B. For
example, implementation of an
individualized education program (IEP)
developed in accordance with IDEA Part
B is one means of meeting the standard
for an appropriate education under the
Section 504 implementing regulations.
See 34 CFR 104.33(b)(2). Likewise, the
Section 504 implementing regulations
require evaluations and reevaluations
that meet certain criteria. 34 CFR
104.35(a), (b), and (d).
(a) Given the limitation that the
Secretary may not waive any statutory
or regulatory requirements of, or relating
to, applicable civil rights requirements,
the Department is seeking public
comment on the best ways to address
the close relationship between IDEA
and the Section 504 protections that
apply to school-aged children with
disabilities.
(b) Because of the overlap between
IDEA and Section 504, should States, in
their waiver proposals, be required to
include a specific explanation of why
the waiver sought would not conflict
with requirements of, or relating to,
Section 504 and its implementing
regulations?
3. We are particularly interested in
comments regarding paragraphs (a)(6)
and (a)(7) of the proposed requirements.
These requirements originally appeared
in the 2007 final requirement. (We
discuss the 2007 final requirements in
greater detail in the Background section
of this notice.) However, we are
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34555
interested in public comment on
whether these paragraphs are
sufficiently clear that parents have the
right to understand and consent to
changes that affect their children’s
education and do not imply that waivers
of FAPE are permitted under this
program.
During and after the comment period,
you may inspect all public comments
about the proposed requirements and
definition by accessing Regulations.gov.
You may also inspect the comments in
person in room 5163, 550 12th Street
SW, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington,
DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and
4:00 p.m., Eastern 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 the proposed requirements
and definition. 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.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of
this program is to provide an
opportunity for States to reduce
excessive paperwork and
noninstructional time burdens on
special education teachers, related
services providers, and State and local
administrators, thus increasing time and
resources available for instruction and
other activities that would improve
educational and functional results for
children with disabilities.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1408.
Proposed Requirements
Background
The Secretary believes that all
students should be given the
opportunity to succeed and that their
success should be the primary focus of
everyone in the educational system.
When teachers, related services
providers, and administrators who serve
children with disabilities spend time
completing unnecessary paperwork,
their ability to prioritize and focus on
improving outcomes for children with
disabilities is hampered.
In the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA,
Congress recognized that some Federal
IDEA Part B requirements could create
excessive paperwork and
noninstructional time burdens on
E:\FR\FM\05JNP1.SGM
05JNP1
34556
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 109 / Friday, June 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
special education teachers, related
services providers, and State and local
administrators, thus diverting time and
resources away from instruction and
other activities that would improve
educational and functional results for
children with disabilities.
As such, under section 609 of IDEA,
Congress gave the Department limited
authority to grant waivers of certain
requirements of IDEA Part B. Waivers
may be granted to not more than 15
States and for a period not to exceed 4
years. Further, the Secretary may not
waive any statutory or regulatory
provisions relating to applicable civil
rights requirements or allow a State or
local educational agency to waive
procedural safeguards under section 615
of IDEA, and waivers may not affect the
right of a child with a disability to
receive a free appropriate public
education (FAPE) under IDEA Part B. In
short, States’ waiver proposals must
preserve the fundamental rights of
children with disabilities under IDEA.1
In addition, States have always had the
authority, within the constraints of State
law, to change or waive State
requirements that exceed IDEA statutory
and regulatory requirements in order to
reduce administrative burden.
In this document, we are proposing
requirements and a definition for States
to apply for paperwork waivers under
section 609 of IDEA and thereby
increase the time and resources
available for instruction and other
activities aimed at improving
educational and functional results for
children with disabilities.
Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register, we are proposing priorities,
requirements, and selection criteria for
the IDEA Paperwork Reduction
Planning and Implementation program,
through which the Department intends
to make grant funds available to plan for
and implement reductions of excessive
paperwork and noninstructional time
burdens under IDEA section 609.
IDEA is silent with respect to the
selection criteria the Department may
use to evaluate State proposals. On
October 12, 2007, through a notice
published in the Federal Register, the
Department solicited State proposals
under what was then called the IDEA
1 For any State that receives a waiver of Federal
IDEA Part B requirements, the Secretary will
terminate the waiver if the Secretary determines
that the State failed to appropriately implement its
waiver, or the Secretary determines the State needs
assistance in implementing IDEA requirements and
the waiver has contributed to or caused such need
for assistance. The Secretary will also terminate the
waiver if the Secretary determines the State needs
intervention in implementing IDEA requirements,
or needs substantial intervention in implementing
IDEA requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:12 Jun 04, 2020
Jkt 250001
Paperwork Waiver Demonstration
Program (72 FR 58066). At that time, the
Department relied on a notice of final
additional requirements and selection
criteria published in the Federal
Register on July 6, 2007 (72 FR 36970),
which, in part, governed how States
could apply for a waiver under IDEA
section 609. However, that notice
specified that the additional
requirements and selection criteria were
only eligible to be used once, which the
Department did in 2007.
We are, therefore, again issuing a
notice of proposed requirements and
definition for waiver proposals. The
Department is proposing to use many of
the same requirements for the waivers
as it did in 2007 because we believe
they still represent a sensible and
practical approach to implementating
the statutory requirements in section
609 of IDEA. Specifically, paragraphs
(a)(1) through (7) of these proposed
requirements come from the 2007
notice. We invite public comment on
the extent to which those requirements
remain appropriate and whether the
Department should include fewer,
additional, or different requirements.
Further, section 609(a)(3) of IDEA
establishes requirements for a State’s
waiver proposal. Paragraphs (a)(8) and
(9) of the proposed requirements reflect
those requirements. Consistent with
IDEA sections 602(22), 602(31), and 610,
‘‘State’’ means each of the 50 States, the
District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, each of
the outlying areas (United States Virgin
Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and
the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands), and the freely
associated States (the Republic of the
Marshall Islands, the Federated States of
Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau).
Finally, the Department is primarily
interested in granting waiver proposals
designed to produce the greatest
benefits as measured by the number of
burden hours reduced, the number of
instructional hours gained, and the
number of personnel and students with
disabilities positively affected by the
waivers. As a result, paragraphs (a)(10),
(a)(11), (b), (c), (d), and (e) of the
proposed requirements require States, in
their waiver proposals, to include a
discussion of (1) the interaction between
the Federal IDEA Part B requirements
they propose to waive and any related
State requirements, (2) activities the
State proposes to undertake to
implement the proposed waiver, and (3)
how the State will evaluate the
effectiveness of the proposed waiver.
The Department intends to accept
waiver proposals from States for 12
months following publication of an
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
appropriate notice. The Department will
review each proposal to determine
whether the waivers are legally
permissible and likely to generate the
meaningful benefits contemplated in
IDEA for personnel and the students
with disabilities they serve.
Proposed Requirements: We propose
the following requirements for a
proposal to waive certain requirements
of, or relating to, IDEA Part B under
section 609. We may apply one or more
of these requirements in any year in
which this program is in effect.
(a) An applicant must include in its
proposal the following:
(1) A description of how the State 2
met the public participation
requirements of section 612(a)(19) of
IDEA, including how the State—
(i) Involved multiple stakeholders,
including parents, children with
disabilities, special education and
regular education teachers, related
services providers, and school and
district administrators, in selecting the
requirements proposed for the waiver
and any specific proposals for changing
those requirements to reduce excessive
paperwork; and
(ii) Provided an opportunity for
public comment, including from
individuals with disabilities and parents
of children with disabilities, in selecting
the requirements proposed for the
waiver.
(iii) Held public hearings, and
provided adequate notice of the
hearings, to solicit input on the
selection of requirements proposed for
the waiver.
(2) A summary of public comments
received in accordance with paragraph
(a)(1) of these requirements and how the
public comments were addressed in the
proposal.
(3) A description of the procedures
the State will employ to ensure that, if
the waiver is granted, it will not result
in a denial of FAPE to any child with
a disability, infringe on any applicable
civil rights requirements, or result in a
waiver of any procedural safeguards
under section 615 of IDEA. This
description also must include an
assurance that the State will collect and
report to the Department, as part of the
State’s annual performance report to the
Secretary in accordance with section
616(b)(2)(C)(ii)(II) of IDEA, all State
2 Consistent with IDEA sections 602(22), 602(31),
and 610, ‘‘State’’ means each of the 50 States, the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, each of the outlying areas (United States
Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands),
and the freely associated States (the Republic of the
Marshall Islands, the Federated States of
Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau).
E:\FR\FM\05JNP1.SGM
05JNP1
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 109 / Friday, June 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
complaints and due process hearings
resulting from the waivers and related to
the denial of FAPE to any child with a
disability or a waiver of any procedural
safeguards under section 615 of IDEA
and how the State responded to this
information, including the outcome of
that response such as providing
technical assistance to the local
educational agency (LEA) to improve
implementation, or suspending or
terminating the authority of an LEA to
waive paperwork requirements due to
unresolved compliance problems.
(4) A description of the procedures
the State will employ to ensure that
diverse stakeholders (including parents,
teachers, administrators, related services
providers, and other stakeholders, as
appropriate) understand the proposed
elements of the State’s submission for
the IDEA Paperwork Reduction Waivers.
(5) Assurances that every parent of a
child with a disability in participating
LEAs will be given, in easily
understandable language, written notice
(in the native language of the parent,
unless it is clearly not feasible to do so)
of all statutory, regulatory, or State
requirements that will be waived and
the procedures that the State will
employ under paragraph (a)(3) of these
requirements.
(6) Assurances that the State will
require any participating LEA to obtain
voluntary informed written consent
from parents for a waiver of any
paperwork requirements related to the
provision of FAPE.
(7) Assurances that the State will
require any participating LEA to inform
parents in writing (in the native
language of the parents, unless it is
clearly not feasible to do so) of—
(i) Any differences between the
paperwork requirements under the
waiver program approved for the State
and the existing paperwork
requirements of IDEA related to the
provision of FAPE;
(ii) The parent’s right to revoke
consent to waive any paperwork
requirements related to the provision of
FAPE at any time; and
(iii) The LEA’s responsibility to meet
all paperwork requirements related to
the provision of FAPE if the parent does
not provide voluntary written informed
consent or revokes consent.
(8) A list of any statutory
requirements of, or regulatory
requirements relating to, IDEA Part B
that the State desires the Secretary to
waive, in whole or in part. For each
requirement, the State should discuss
how waiving the requirement will—
(i) Reduce excessive paperwork and
noninstructional time burdens on
special education teachers, related
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:12 Jun 04, 2020
Jkt 250001
services providers, and State and local
administrators;
(ii) Not affect the right of a child with
a disability to receive FAPE under IDEA
Part B, infringe on any applicable civil
rights requirements, or result in the
waiver of any procedural safeguards
under section 615 of IDEA.
(9) A list of any State requirements
that the State proposes to waive or
change, in whole or in part, to carry out
a waiver granted to the State by the
Secretary.
(10) A description of the interplay
between the requirements described in
paragraph (a)(8) and any State
requirements including, but not limited
to, those described in paragraph (a)(9).
(11) A description of the anticipated
benefits of the proposed waiver,
including, but not limited to—
(i) The total reduction in burden
hours on State and local personnel and
the total number of instructional hours
gained, disaggregated by applicable
statutory or regulatory provision;
(ii) The total number of administrators
and direct service providers affected,
including the number of individuals in
each group, disaggregated by applicable
statutory or regulatory provision; and
(iii) The total number of likely
beneficiaries, and the magnitude and
scope of anticipated benefits and other
activities intended to improve
educational and functional results for
children with disabilities.
(12) A State that received a planning
grant under the IDEA Paperwork
Reduction Planning and
Implementation Program (84.326F) must
include in its waiver proposal the plan
the State developed under that program.
(b) An applicant must include in its
proposal its proposed plan to
disseminate information and materials
regarding any revisions to requirements,
policies, procedures, or practices made
in conjunction with the waiver to
relevant stakeholders, including, but not
limited to, LEAs; private schools
(including parochial schools) that
provide services to children with
disabilities; charter management
organizations; the State Advisory Panel,
as defined in section 612(a)(21) of IDEA;
and parent organizations, as that term is
defined in sections 671(a)(2) and
672(a)(2) of IDEA.
(c) An applicant must assure that it
will make publicly available all
information regarding changes to
requirements, policies, procedures, or
practices made in conjunction with the
waiver.
(d) An applicant must include in its
proposal its proposed plan to provide
training on revisions to requirements,
policies, procedures, or practices made
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34557
under the waiver to staff in LEAs,
private schools (including parochial
schools) that provide services to
children with disabilities, and other
appropriate service providers and
administrators.
(e) An applicant must include in its
proposal its proposed plan to collect
and analyze data on specific and
measurable goals, objectives, and
outcomes of the project related to the
implementation of any waiver granted,
including data on the effectiveness of
the waiver in—
(1) Reducing—
(i) The paperwork burden on teachers,
principals, administrators, and related
services providers; and
(ii) Noninstructional time spent by
teachers in complying with IDEA Part B;
(2) Enhancing longer-term educational
planning;
(3) Improving positive outcomes,
including educational and functional
results, for children with disabilities;
(4) Promoting collaboration between
IEP Team members; and
(5) Ensuring satisfaction of family
members.
(f) An applicant must submit its
proposal with a letter signed by an
appropriate State official, or his or her
designee, stating that—
(1) The appropriate State official is
authorized to make the proposal for a
waiver under State law; and
(2) The proposal meets all of the
applicable requirements for a waiver.
Proposed Definition
We propose the following definition
for the proposed requirements. We may
apply this definition in any year in
which the requirements are in effect.
‘‘Applicable civil rights
requirements,’’ includes, but is not
limited to, the civil rights protections in
the United States Constitution and the
requirements in the following
legislation and their respective
implementing regulations:
(1) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, as amended.
(2) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964.
(3) Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972.
(4) Title II of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990.
(5) Age Discrimination Act of 1975.
Final Requirements and Definition
We will announce the final
requirements and definition in a
document in the Federal Register. We
will determine the final requirements
and definition after considering public
comments on the proposed
requirements and definition and other
E:\FR\FM\05JNP1.SGM
05JNP1
34558
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 109 / Friday, June 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
information available to the Department.
This document does not preclude us
from proposing priorities, additional
requirements, additional definitions, or
selection criteria subject to meeting
applicable rulemaking requirements.
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Note: This document does not solicit
applications. In any year in which we choose
to use the resulting final requirements and
definition, we intend to invite applications
through a separate notice in the Federal
Register.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
13771 Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) determines whether this
regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and,
therefore, subject to the requirements of
the Executive order and subject to
review by 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.
OMB has determined that this
proposed 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 rule 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 FY 2020, any new incremental costs
associated with a new regulation must
be fully offset by the elimination of
existing costs through deregulatory
actions. Because the proposed
regulatory action is not significant, the
requirements of Executive Order 13771
do not apply.
We have also reviewed this proposed
regulatory action under Executive Order
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:12 Jun 04, 2020
Jkt 250001
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 the proposed
requirements and definition based on a
reasoned determination that the benefits
would justify the 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
this regulatory action is 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
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
are those resulting from statutory
requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for
administering the Department’s
programs and activities. These potential
costs are those that would be incurred
by a State making an application for a
waiver to the Secretary following the
requirements proposed by this
regulatory action.
In addition, we have considered the
potential benefits of this regulatory
action and have noted these benefits in
the background section of this
document. The potential benefits
include a reduction in the
administrative burden hours under
IDEA on State and local personnel and
a corresponding gain in instructional
time and services for children with
disabilities.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The proposed requirements contain
information collection requirements that
are approved by OMB under OMB
control number 1820–0028; the
proposed requirements do not affect the
currently approved data collection.
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
requirements and definition 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?
• 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 (RFA)
Certification: The Secretary certifies that
E:\FR\FM\05JNP1.SGM
05JNP1
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 109 / Friday, June 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
this proposed regulatory action would
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) Size Standards
define ‘‘small entities’’ as for-profit or
nonprofit institutions with total annual
revenue below $7,000,000 or, if they are
institutions controlled by small
governmental jurisdictions (that are
comprised of cities, counties, towns,
townships, villages, school districts, or
special districts), with a population of
less than 50,000.
The proposed requirements and
definition would not affect any small
entities, as only States, as defined in the
IDEA, are eligible to apply. No States
qualify as small entities for purposes of
the RFA.
Intergovernmental Review: This
program is subject to Executive Order
12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR
part 79. One of the objectives of the
Executive order is to foster an
intergovernmental partnership and a
strengthened federalism. The Executive
order relies on processes developed by
State and local governments for
coordination and review of proposed
Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early
notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
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.
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 at
www.govinfo.gov. 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 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:12 Jun 04, 2020
Jkt 250001
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Mark Schultz,
Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services
Administration. Delegated the authority to
perform the functions and duties of the
Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2020–11416 Filed 6–4–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2020–0110; FRL–10010–
34–Region 8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Colorado; Revisions to Air Pollution
Emission Notice Rules
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions and renumbering submitted by
the State of Colorado on May 8, 2019.
Specifically, the EPA is proposing to
approve amendments to Colorado’s
Stationary Source Permitting and Air
Pollution Emission Notice Requirements
in 5 CCR 1001–5, Regulation Number 3.
The EPA is taking this action pursuant
to sections 110 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA).
DATES: Comments: Written comments
must be received on or before July 6,
2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
OAR–2020–0110, to the Federal
Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from
www.regulations.gov. The EPA may
publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e., on the web,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34559
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov. To reduce the risk
of COVID–19 transmission, for this
action we do not plan to offer hard copy
review of the docket. Please email or
call the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section if you
need to make alternative arrangements
for access to the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin Leone, Air and Radiation
Division, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode
8ARD–IO, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303)
312–6227, leone.kevin@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document wherever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
the EPA.
I. Background
On May 8, 2019, the State of Colorado
submitted a SIP revision containing
amendments to 5 CCR 1001–5,
Regulation Number 3 (Stationary Source
Permitting and Air Pollution Emission
Notice Requirements). Specifically,
these amendments revised Part A, VI.C.
(Annual Emissions Fees) and VI.D. (Fee
Schedule). These revisions are
anticipated to cover revenue shortfalls
and ensure continued program viability
by increasing stationary source fees. The
State of Colorado adopted these
revisions on October 18, 2018, and they
became State effective on November 30,
2018. We are proposing approval of all
revisions submitted on May 8, 2019.
II. Analysis of State Submittal
We evaluated the State’s May 8, 2019,
submittal regarding revisions Regulation
Number 3, Part A, Section VI.
1. VI.C.2
A reference to Section VI.D.1 is being
revised to VI.D.3 to coincide with
revisions to VI.D.
E:\FR\FM\05JNP1.SGM
05JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 109 (Friday, June 5, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34554-34559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11416]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter III
[Docket ID ED-2020-OSERS-0015]
Proposed Requirements--The Individuals With Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA) Paperwork Reduction Waivers
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Proposed requirements and definition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) proposes requirements
and a definition for waivers under section 609 of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The Department may select as many as
15 States to receive waivers of statutory requirements of, or
regulatory requirements relating to, IDEA Part B, for a period of time
not to exceed 4 years, to reduce excessive paperwork and
noninstructional time burdens that do not assist in improving
educational and functional results for children with disabilities. The
purpose of these waivers is to increase the time and resources
available for instruction and other activities aimed at improving
educational and functional results for children with disabilities.
Statutory requirements of, or regulatory
[[Page 34555]]
requirements relating to, applicable civil rights requirements or
procedural safeguards under section 615 of IDEA may not be waived. The
Department may use these proposed requirements and definition in fiscal
year (FY) 2020 and later years.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before August 19, 2020.
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 ``Help.''
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you
mail or deliver your comments about these proposed requirements,
address them to David Egnor, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW, Room 5163, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-5076.
Privacy Note: The Department's policy is to make all comments
received from members of the public 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: David Egnor, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5163, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-7334. Email:
[email protected].
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
the proposed requirements and definition. To ensure that your comments
have maximum effect in developing the final requirements and
definition, we urge you to identify clearly the specific section of the
proposed requirements or definition that each comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 and their
overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result
from these proposed requirements and definition. 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 program.
Directed Questions
1. We invite public comment on whether there are other specific
issues the Department should consider when evaluating waiver proposals
and whether we should require States, in their proposals, to provide
further explanations of the legal and research-based supports for their
proposals.
2. The Department's regulations implementing Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) and covering recipients that
serve school-aged children with disabilities, as set out in 34 CFR
104.31 through 104.36, contain civil rights protections that often
overlap with, or can be met through the implementation of, the
protections in IDEA Part B. For example, implementation of an
individualized education program (IEP) developed in accordance with
IDEA Part B is one means of meeting the standard for an appropriate
education under the Section 504 implementing regulations. See 34 CFR
104.33(b)(2). Likewise, the Section 504 implementing regulations
require evaluations and reevaluations that meet certain criteria. 34
CFR 104.35(a), (b), and (d).
(a) Given the limitation that the Secretary may not waive any
statutory or regulatory requirements of, or relating to, applicable
civil rights requirements, the Department is seeking public comment on
the best ways to address the close relationship between IDEA and the
Section 504 protections that apply to school-aged children with
disabilities.
(b) Because of the overlap between IDEA and Section 504, should
States, in their waiver proposals, be required to include a specific
explanation of why the waiver sought would not conflict with
requirements of, or relating to, Section 504 and its implementing
regulations?
3. We are particularly interested in comments regarding paragraphs
(a)(6) and (a)(7) of the proposed requirements. These requirements
originally appeared in the 2007 final requirement. (We discuss the 2007
final requirements in greater detail in the Background section of this
notice.) However, we are interested in public comment on whether these
paragraphs are sufficiently clear that parents have the right to
understand and consent to changes that affect their children's
education and do not imply that waivers of FAPE are permitted under
this program.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about the proposed requirements and definition by accessing
Regulations.gov. You may also inspect the comments in person in room
5163, 550 12th Street SW, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC, between
the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Eastern 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 the proposed requirements and definition.
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.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of this program is to provide an
opportunity for States to reduce excessive paperwork and
noninstructional time burdens on special education teachers, related
services providers, and State and local administrators, thus increasing
time and resources available for instruction and other activities that
would improve educational and functional results for children with
disabilities.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1408.
Proposed Requirements
Background
The Secretary believes that all students should be given the
opportunity to succeed and that their success should be the primary
focus of everyone in the educational system. When teachers, related
services providers, and administrators who serve children with
disabilities spend time completing unnecessary paperwork, their ability
to prioritize and focus on improving outcomes for children with
disabilities is hampered.
In the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA, Congress recognized that some
Federal IDEA Part B requirements could create excessive paperwork and
noninstructional time burdens on
[[Page 34556]]
special education teachers, related services providers, and State and
local administrators, thus diverting time and resources away from
instruction and other activities that would improve educational and
functional results for children with disabilities.
As such, under section 609 of IDEA, Congress gave the Department
limited authority to grant waivers of certain requirements of IDEA Part
B. Waivers may be granted to not more than 15 States and for a period
not to exceed 4 years. Further, the Secretary may not waive any
statutory or regulatory provisions relating to applicable civil rights
requirements or allow a State or local educational agency to waive
procedural safeguards under section 615 of IDEA, and waivers may not
affect the right of a child with a disability to receive a free
appropriate public education (FAPE) under IDEA Part B. In short,
States' waiver proposals must preserve the fundamental rights of
children with disabilities under IDEA.\1\ In addition, States have
always had the authority, within the constraints of State law, to
change or waive State requirements that exceed IDEA statutory and
regulatory requirements in order to reduce administrative burden.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For any State that receives a waiver of Federal IDEA Part B
requirements, the Secretary will terminate the waiver if the
Secretary determines that the State failed to appropriately
implement its waiver, or the Secretary determines the State needs
assistance in implementing IDEA requirements and the waiver has
contributed to or caused such need for assistance. The Secretary
will also terminate the waiver if the Secretary determines the State
needs intervention in implementing IDEA requirements, or needs
substantial intervention in implementing IDEA requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this document, we are proposing requirements and a definition
for States to apply for paperwork waivers under section 609 of IDEA and
thereby increase the time and resources available for instruction and
other activities aimed at improving educational and functional results
for children with disabilities.
Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, we are proposing
priorities, requirements, and selection criteria for the IDEA Paperwork
Reduction Planning and Implementation program, through which the
Department intends to make grant funds available to plan for and
implement reductions of excessive paperwork and noninstructional time
burdens under IDEA section 609.
IDEA is silent with respect to the selection criteria the
Department may use to evaluate State proposals. On October 12, 2007,
through a notice published in the Federal Register, the Department
solicited State proposals under what was then called the IDEA Paperwork
Waiver Demonstration Program (72 FR 58066). At that time, the
Department relied on a notice of final additional requirements and
selection criteria published in the Federal Register on July 6, 2007
(72 FR 36970), which, in part, governed how States could apply for a
waiver under IDEA section 609. However, that notice specified that the
additional requirements and selection criteria were only eligible to be
used once, which the Department did in 2007.
We are, therefore, again issuing a notice of proposed requirements
and definition for waiver proposals. The Department is proposing to use
many of the same requirements for the waivers as it did in 2007 because
we believe they still represent a sensible and practical approach to
implementating the statutory requirements in section 609 of IDEA.
Specifically, paragraphs (a)(1) through (7) of these proposed
requirements come from the 2007 notice. We invite public comment on the
extent to which those requirements remain appropriate and whether the
Department should include fewer, additional, or different requirements.
Further, section 609(a)(3) of IDEA establishes requirements for a
State's waiver proposal. Paragraphs (a)(8) and (9) of the proposed
requirements reflect those requirements. Consistent with IDEA sections
602(22), 602(31), and 610, ``State'' means each of the 50 States, the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, each of the
outlying areas (United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands), and the freely
associated States (the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated
States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau).
Finally, the Department is primarily interested in granting waiver
proposals designed to produce the greatest benefits as measured by the
number of burden hours reduced, the number of instructional hours
gained, and the number of personnel and students with disabilities
positively affected by the waivers. As a result, paragraphs (a)(10),
(a)(11), (b), (c), (d), and (e) of the proposed requirements require
States, in their waiver proposals, to include a discussion of (1) the
interaction between the Federal IDEA Part B requirements they propose
to waive and any related State requirements, (2) activities the State
proposes to undertake to implement the proposed waiver, and (3) how the
State will evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed waiver.
The Department intends to accept waiver proposals from States for
12 months following publication of an appropriate notice. The
Department will review each proposal to determine whether the waivers
are legally permissible and likely to generate the meaningful benefits
contemplated in IDEA for personnel and the students with disabilities
they serve.
Proposed Requirements: We propose the following requirements for a
proposal to waive certain requirements of, or relating to, IDEA Part B
under section 609. We may apply one or more of these requirements in
any year in which this program is in effect.
(a) An applicant must include in its proposal the following:
(1) A description of how the State \2\ met the public participation
requirements of section 612(a)(19) of IDEA, including how the State--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Consistent with IDEA sections 602(22), 602(31), and 610,
``State'' means each of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, each of the outlying areas (United
States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands), and the freely associated States (the
Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of
Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Involved multiple stakeholders, including parents, children
with disabilities, special education and regular education teachers,
related services providers, and school and district administrators, in
selecting the requirements proposed for the waiver and any specific
proposals for changing those requirements to reduce excessive
paperwork; and
(ii) Provided an opportunity for public comment, including from
individuals with disabilities and parents of children with
disabilities, in selecting the requirements proposed for the waiver.
(iii) Held public hearings, and provided adequate notice of the
hearings, to solicit input on the selection of requirements proposed
for the waiver.
(2) A summary of public comments received in accordance with
paragraph (a)(1) of these requirements and how the public comments were
addressed in the proposal.
(3) A description of the procedures the State will employ to ensure
that, if the waiver is granted, it will not result in a denial of FAPE
to any child with a disability, infringe on any applicable civil rights
requirements, or result in a waiver of any procedural safeguards under
section 615 of IDEA. This description also must include an assurance
that the State will collect and report to the Department, as part of
the State's annual performance report to the Secretary in accordance
with section 616(b)(2)(C)(ii)(II) of IDEA, all State
[[Page 34557]]
complaints and due process hearings resulting from the waivers and
related to the denial of FAPE to any child with a disability or a
waiver of any procedural safeguards under section 615 of IDEA and how
the State responded to this information, including the outcome of that
response such as providing technical assistance to the local
educational agency (LEA) to improve implementation, or suspending or
terminating the authority of an LEA to waive paperwork requirements due
to unresolved compliance problems.
(4) A description of the procedures the State will employ to ensure
that diverse stakeholders (including parents, teachers, administrators,
related services providers, and other stakeholders, as appropriate)
understand the proposed elements of the State's submission for the IDEA
Paperwork Reduction Waivers.
(5) Assurances that every parent of a child with a disability in
participating LEAs will be given, in easily understandable language,
written notice (in the native language of the parent, unless it is
clearly not feasible to do so) of all statutory, regulatory, or State
requirements that will be waived and the procedures that the State will
employ under paragraph (a)(3) of these requirements.
(6) Assurances that the State will require any participating LEA to
obtain voluntary informed written consent from parents for a waiver of
any paperwork requirements related to the provision of FAPE.
(7) Assurances that the State will require any participating LEA to
inform parents in writing (in the native language of the parents,
unless it is clearly not feasible to do so) of--
(i) Any differences between the paperwork requirements under the
waiver program approved for the State and the existing paperwork
requirements of IDEA related to the provision of FAPE;
(ii) The parent's right to revoke consent to waive any paperwork
requirements related to the provision of FAPE at any time; and
(iii) The LEA's responsibility to meet all paperwork requirements
related to the provision of FAPE if the parent does not provide
voluntary written informed consent or revokes consent.
(8) A list of any statutory requirements of, or regulatory
requirements relating to, IDEA Part B that the State desires the
Secretary to waive, in whole or in part. For each requirement, the
State should discuss how waiving the requirement will--
(i) Reduce excessive paperwork and noninstructional time burdens on
special education teachers, related services providers, and State and
local administrators;
(ii) Not affect the right of a child with a disability to receive
FAPE under IDEA Part B, infringe on any applicable civil rights
requirements, or result in the waiver of any procedural safeguards
under section 615 of IDEA.
(9) A list of any State requirements that the State proposes to
waive or change, in whole or in part, to carry out a waiver granted to
the State by the Secretary.
(10) A description of the interplay between the requirements
described in paragraph (a)(8) and any State requirements including, but
not limited to, those described in paragraph (a)(9).
(11) A description of the anticipated benefits of the proposed
waiver, including, but not limited to--
(i) The total reduction in burden hours on State and local
personnel and the total number of instructional hours gained,
disaggregated by applicable statutory or regulatory provision;
(ii) The total number of administrators and direct service
providers affected, including the number of individuals in each group,
disaggregated by applicable statutory or regulatory provision; and
(iii) The total number of likely beneficiaries, and the magnitude
and scope of anticipated benefits and other activities intended to
improve educational and functional results for children with
disabilities.
(12) A State that received a planning grant under the IDEA
Paperwork Reduction Planning and Implementation Program (84.326F) must
include in its waiver proposal the plan the State developed under that
program.
(b) An applicant must include in its proposal its proposed plan to
disseminate information and materials regarding any revisions to
requirements, policies, procedures, or practices made in conjunction
with the waiver to relevant stakeholders, including, but not limited
to, LEAs; private schools (including parochial schools) that provide
services to children with disabilities; charter management
organizations; the State Advisory Panel, as defined in section
612(a)(21) of IDEA; and parent organizations, as that term is defined
in sections 671(a)(2) and 672(a)(2) of IDEA.
(c) An applicant must assure that it will make publicly available
all information regarding changes to requirements, policies,
procedures, or practices made in conjunction with the waiver.
(d) An applicant must include in its proposal its proposed plan to
provide training on revisions to requirements, policies, procedures, or
practices made under the waiver to staff in LEAs, private schools
(including parochial schools) that provide services to children with
disabilities, and other appropriate service providers and
administrators.
(e) An applicant must include in its proposal its proposed plan to
collect and analyze data on specific and measurable goals, objectives,
and outcomes of the project related to the implementation of any waiver
granted, including data on the effectiveness of the waiver in--
(1) Reducing--
(i) The paperwork burden on teachers, principals, administrators,
and related services providers; and
(ii) Noninstructional time spent by teachers in complying with IDEA
Part B;
(2) Enhancing longer-term educational planning;
(3) Improving positive outcomes, including educational and
functional results, for children with disabilities;
(4) Promoting collaboration between IEP Team members; and
(5) Ensuring satisfaction of family members.
(f) An applicant must submit its proposal with a letter signed by
an appropriate State official, or his or her designee, stating that--
(1) The appropriate State official is authorized to make the
proposal for a waiver under State law; and
(2) The proposal meets all of the applicable requirements for a
waiver.
Proposed Definition
We propose the following definition for the proposed requirements.
We may apply this definition in any year in which the requirements are
in effect.
``Applicable civil rights requirements,'' includes, but is not
limited to, the civil rights protections in the United States
Constitution and the requirements in the following legislation and
their respective implementing regulations:
(1) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.
(2) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
(3) Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.
(4) Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
(5) Age Discrimination Act of 1975.
Final Requirements and Definition
We will announce the final requirements and definition in a
document in the Federal Register. We will determine the final
requirements and definition after considering public comments on the
proposed requirements and definition and other
[[Page 34558]]
information available to the Department. This document does not
preclude us from proposing priorities, additional requirements,
additional definitions, or selection criteria subject to meeting
applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year
in which we choose to use the resulting final requirements and
definition, we intend to invite applications through a separate
notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) determines whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and
subject to review by 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.
OMB has determined that this proposed 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 rule 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 FY 2020, any new incremental costs associated
with a new regulation must be fully offset by the elimination of
existing costs through deregulatory actions. Because the proposed
regulatory action is not significant, the requirements of Executive
Order 13771 do not apply.
We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action 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 the proposed requirements and definition based on a
reasoned determination that the benefits would justify the 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 this regulatory action is
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 are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
These potential costs are those that would be incurred by a State
making an application for a waiver to the Secretary following the
requirements proposed by this regulatory action.
In addition, we have considered the potential benefits of this
regulatory action and have noted these benefits in the background
section of this document. The potential benefits include a reduction in
the administrative burden hours under IDEA on State and local personnel
and a corresponding gain in instructional time and services for
children with disabilities.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The proposed requirements contain information collection
requirements that are approved by OMB under OMB control number 1820-
0028; the proposed requirements do not affect the currently approved
data collection.
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
requirements and definition 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?
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 (RFA) Certification: The Secretary
certifies that
[[Page 34559]]
this proposed regulatory action would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The U.S. Small
Business Administration (SBA) Size Standards define ``small entities''
as for-profit or nonprofit institutions with total annual revenue below
$7,000,000 or, if they are institutions controlled by small
governmental jurisdictions (that are comprised of cities, counties,
towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts),
with a population of less than 50,000.
The proposed requirements and definition would not affect any small
entities, as only States, as defined in the IDEA, are eligible to
apply. No States qualify as small entities for purposes of the RFA.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
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.
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 at www.govinfo.gov. 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
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.
Mark Schultz,
Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration. Delegated the
authority to perform the functions and duties of the Assistant
Secretary for the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2020-11416 Filed 6-4-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
