Proposed Priorities, Requirements, and Definitions-Expanding Opportunity Through Quality Charter Schools Program (CSP)-National Dissemination Grants, 83862-83868 [2020-28411]
Download as PDF
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
83862
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(6) Solely for purposes of the
exemption applicable to any transaction
in currency in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, to the extent of its domestic
operations and only with respect to
transactions conducted through its
exemptible accounts, any other
commercial enterprise (for purposes of
this section, a ‘‘non-listed business’’),
other than an enterprise specified in
paragraph (e)(8) of this section, that:
*
*
*
*
*
(7) Solely for purposes of the
exemption applicable to any transaction
in currency in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, with respect solely to
withdrawals for payroll purposes from
existing exemptible accounts, any other
person (for purposes of this section, a
‘‘payroll customer’’) that:
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) A bank is not required to file a
FinCEN Form 110 with respect to the
transfer of convertible virtual currency
or digital assets with legal tender status
to or from any exempt person as
described in paragraphs (b)(1) to (3) of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(1) No bank shall be subject to penalty
under this chapter for failure to file a
report required by § 1010.311 or
§ 1010.316 of this chapter with respect
to a transaction in currency, convertible
virtual currency, or digital assets with
legal tender status by an exempt person
with respect to which the requirements
of this section have been satisfied,
unless the bank:
*
*
*
*
*
(3) A bank that files a report with
respect to a currency, convertible virtual
currency, or digital asset with legal
tender status transaction by an exempt
person rather than treating such person
as exempt shall remain subject, with
respect to each such report, to the rules
for filing reports, and the penalties for
filing false or incomplete reports that
are applicable to reporting of
transactions in currency, convertible
virtual currency, or digital assets with
legal tender status by persons other than
exempt persons.
(h) Obligations to file suspicious
activity reports and maintain system for
monitoring transactions in currency,
convertible virtual currency, or digital
assets with legal tender status.
(1) Nothing in this section relieves a
bank of the obligation, or reduces in any
way such bank’s obligation, to file a
report required by § 1020.320 with
respect to any transaction, including
any transaction in currency, convertible
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Dec 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
virtual currency, or digital assets with
legal tender status, that a bank knows,
suspects, or has reason to suspect is a
transaction or attempted transaction that
is described in § 1020.320(a)(2)(i), (ii), or
(iii), or relieves a bank of any reporting
or recordkeeping obligation imposed by
this chapter (except the obligation to
report transactions in currency,
convertible virtual currency, or digital
assets with legal tender status, pursuant
to this chapter to the extent provided in
this section). Thus, for example, a sharp
increase from one year to the next in the
gross total of currency transactions
made by an exempt customer, or
similarly anomalous transactions trends
or patterns, may trigger the obligation of
a bank under § 1020.320.
■ 15. Add § 1020.316 to read as follows:
§ 1020.316 Convertible virtual currency
and digital assets with legal tender status
filing obligations.
Refer to § 1010.316 of this chapter for
reports of transactions in convertible
virtual currency and digital assets with
legal tender status filing obligations for
banks.
PART 1022—RULES FOR MONEY
SERVICES BUSINESSES
16. The authority citation for part
1022 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1829b and 1951–1959;
31 U.S.C. 5311–5314 and 5316–5332; title III,
sec. 314, Pub. L. 107–56, 115 Stat. 307; sec.
701, Pub. L. 114–74, 129 Stat. 599.
17. Revise § 1022.310 to read as
follows:
■
§ 1022.310 Reports of transactions in
currency, convertible virtual currency, and
digital assets with legal tender status.
The reports of transactions in
currency and transactions in convertible
virtual currency and digital assets with
legal tender status requirements for
money services businesses are located
in subpart C of part 1010 of this chapter
and this subpart.
■ 18. Revise § 1022.312 to read as
follows:
§ 1022.312
Identification required.
Refer to § 1010.312 of this chapter for
identification requirements for reports
of transactions in currency and
transactions in convertible virtual
currency and digital assets with legal
tender status filed by money services
businesses.
■ 19. Revise § 1022.313 to read as
follows:
§ 1022.313
Aggregation.
Refer to § 1010.313 of this chapter for
reports of transactions in currency and
transactions in convertible virtual
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
currency and digital assets with legal
tender status aggregation requirements
for money services businesses.
■ 20. Add § 1022.316 to read as follows:
§ 1022.316 Convertible virtual currency
and digital assets with legal tender status
filing obligations.
Refer to § 1010.316 of this chapter for
reports of transactions in convertible
virtual currency filing obligations for
money services businesses.
By the Department of the Treasury.
Kenneth A. Blanco,
Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network.
[FR Doc. 2020–28437 Filed 12–18–20; 4:20 pm]
BILLING CODE 4810–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED–2020–OESE–0172]
Proposed Priorities, Requirements,
and Definitions—Expanding
Opportunity Through Quality Charter
Schools Program (CSP)—National
Dissemination Grants
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for
Elementary and Secondary Education
proposes priorities, requirements, and
definitions for the Expanding
Opportunity Through Quality Charter
Schools Program (CSP)—National
Dissemination Grants, Assistance
Listing Number 84.282T. We may use
one or more of these priorities,
requirements, and definitions for
competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2021
and later years. We take this action to
ensure that CSP National Dissemination
Grants are aligned with the statutory
purposes of the CSP and address key
national policy issues. Specifically, the
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions focus on disseminating best
practices for strengthening charter
school authorizing and oversight;
improving charter school access to
facilities and facility financing;
increasing educational choice for
students with disabilities, English
learners, and other traditionally
underserved student groups, including
Native American students and students
in rural communities.
DATES: We must receive your comments
on or before January 22, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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
priorities, requirements, and definitions,
address them to Cheryl Ford, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW, Room 3E207, Washington,
DC 20202–5970.
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:
Cheryl Ford, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 3E207, Washington, DC 20202–
5970. Telephone: (202) 401–1366.
Email: charterschools@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.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you
to submit comments regarding the
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions. To ensure that your
comments have maximum effect in
developing the notice of final priorities,
requirements, and definitions, we urge
you to identify clearly the specific
section of the proposed priority,
requirement, 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 priorities, requirements,
and definitions. Please let us know of
any further ways we could reduce
potential costs or increase potential
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Dec 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
benefits while preserving the effective
and efficient administration of the
program.
During and after the comment period,
you may inspect all public comments
about the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions by
accessing Regulations.gov. Due to the
current COVID–19 public health
emergency, the Department buildings
are not open to the public. However,
upon reopening, you may also inspect
the comments in person at 400
Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E207,
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.
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 priorities,
requirements, and definitions. 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 major
purposes of the CSP are to expand
opportunities for all students,
particularly traditionally underserved
students, to attend charter schools and
meet challenging State academic
standards; provide financial assistance
for the planning, program design, and
initial implementation of charter
schools; increase the number of highquality charter schools available to
students across the United States;
evaluate the impact of charter schools
on student achievement, families, and
communities; share best practices
between charter schools and other
public schools; encourage States to
provide facilities support to charter
schools; and support efforts to
strengthen the charter school
authorizing process.
Through CSP National Dissemination
Grants, the Department provides funds
on a competitive basis to support efforts
by eligible entities to help increase the
number of high-quality charter schools
available to our Nation’s students by
disseminating best practices regarding
charter schools.
Program Authority: Section
4305(a)(3)(B) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as
amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C.
7221d(a)(3)(B).
Background: The Department last
conducted a National Dissemination
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
83863
Grants competition in FY 2018. In that
competition, we invited applications for
projects designed to disseminate best
practices for strengthening charter
school authorizing and oversight or
improving charter school access to
facilities and facility financing, both key
policy issues facing charter schools on
a national scale. This document
proposes similar priorities,
requirements, and definitions as the last
competition in order to continue to
address these key policy issues. These
priorities, requirements, and definitions
take into consideration the continuing
growth of charter schools across the
Nation and the increasing need to
support the capacity and oversight of all
charter schools. The priorities also
recognize the important role that charter
schools can play in increasing
educational choice for students with
disabilities, English learners, and other
traditionally underserved student
groups including Native American
students and students in rural
communities.
Proposed Priorities
This document contains four
proposed priorities. These priorities are:
Proposed Priority 1—Strengthening
Charter School Authorizing and
Oversight.
Background: One of the statutory
purposes of the CSP is to support efforts
to strengthen the charter school
authorizing process to improve
performance management, including
transparency, oversight and monitoring
(including financial audits), and
evaluation of charter schools. Also, the
CSP supports quality, accountability,
and transparency in the operational
performance of all authorized public
chartering agencies, including State
educational agencies (SEAs), local
educational agencies (LEAs), and other
authorizing entities. Specifically, the
CSP State Entity Grants program has a
strong focus on authorizing, including a
requirement that grantees reserve a
portion of funds to provide technical
assistance to authorized public
chartering agencies and work with them
to improve authorizing quality. This
priority would support that emphasis by
prioritizing projects that propose to
develop, identify, or expand, and
disseminate information on best
practices in authorizing and the
oversight of charter schools by
authorized public chartering agencies.
Authorizers are responsible for
conducting rigorous application reviews
to ensure new charter schools can be of
high quality. They are also responsible
for establishing clear and consistent
policies to hold schools accountable for
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
83864
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
meeting their academic, financial, and
operational performance goals, as well
as complying with all applicable laws—
including civil rights laws requiring
equal access. Through this priority, the
Department expects that the
implementation of strong authorizing
practices will proliferate and
continuously improve the quality of the
charter school sector.
Proposed Priority: Projects that are
designed to develop, identify, or
expand, and disseminate information on
best practices in authorizing and
overseeing charter schools by
authorized public chartering agencies in
one or more of the following areas:
(a) Conducting charter school
application reviews.
(b) Establishing governance standards
and practices for charter schools.
(c) Promoting and monitoring the
compliance of charter schools and
authorized public chartering agencies
with Federal, State, and local academic,
financial, governance, operational
(including school safety), or other
applicable requirements.
(d) Evaluating the performance of
charter schools or authorized public
chartering agencies.
(e) Facilitating the replication and
expansion of high-quality charter
schools.
(f) Improving the academic, financial,
or operational performance of charter
schools.
(g) Closing persistently
underperforming charter schools.
To meet this priority, an applicant
must propose to disseminate bestpractices information in multiple
locations in at least two States with a
charter school law.
Proposed Priority 2—Targeting
Educational Agencies with the Most
Need.
Background: This priority would
target information dissemination efforts
toward those entities with the greatest
need, which include States with new or
significantly revised charter school laws
or policies.
To increase opportunities for
authorized public chartering agencies to
establish new, high-quality operational
procedures, and because the period
following enactment or revision of
charter school laws and policies is most
critical to their successful
implementation, this priority would
focus on States where new or revised
charter school laws and policies have
been adopted within the last five years.
In addition, the priority would target
dissemination efforts to aid the
development of authorized public
chartering agencies that support 10 or
fewer schools and, accordingly, have
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Dec 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
limited resources related to economies
of scale, or include struggling schools
under their purview.1
Through this priority, the Department
would support projects that target
information on best practices to improve
the overall quality of, and the ability of
State entities to grow, the charter school
sector within their States.
Proposed Priority: Projects that
propose to target information
dissemination to one or more of the
following:
(a) States that have enacted laws in
the last five years allowing charter
schools to open.
(b) States that in the last five years
have significantly changed their laws,
regulations, or policies regarding
authorizing or oversight of charter
schools by authorized public chartering
agencies.
(c) Authorized public chartering
agencies with fewer than 10 charter
schools.
(d) Authorized public chartering
agencies that authorize a significant
number of charter schools experiencing
significant low performance or noncompliance with Federal, State, or local
academic, financial, governance,
operational (including school safety), or
other applicable requirements.
Proposed Priority 3—Improving
Charter School Access to Facilities and
Facility Financing.
Background: Limited access to
adequate facilities and to funding for
facilities, including per-pupil facilities
aid, remains a significant issue
impacting growth in the number of
charter schools available to students
throughout the United States. To help
address this issue, this priority would
support projects that develop, identify,
or expand, and disseminate information
on, best practices in supporting charter
schools in accessing and financing
facilities.
Proposed Priority: Projects that are
designed to develop, identify, or
expand, and disseminate information
on, best practices in supporting charter
schools in accessing and financing
facilities, including in one or more of
the following areas:
(a) Access to public and private
(including philanthropic) funding,
including from a Qualified Opportunity
Fund under section 1400Z–2 of the
Internal Revenue Code, as amended by
the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (115 Pub. L.
97), for one or more of the following, as
1 National Organization of Charter School
Authorizers(NACSA). (2009). A Report on NACSA’s
Authorizer Survey. Chicago: National Organization
of Charter School Authorizers. Retrieved from
www.qualitycharters.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/
08/NACSA_2008-SOCA.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
needed to open or to replicate or expand
a charter school:
(1) The acquisition (by purchase,
lease, donation, or otherwise) of an
interest (including an interest held by a
third party for the benefit of the school)
in improved or unimproved real
property.
(2) The construction of new facilities,
or the renovation, repair, or alteration of
existing facilities.
(3) The predevelopment costs
required to assess sites for purposes of
paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this priority.
(4) The acquisition of other tangible
property.
(b) Access to public facilities,
including the right of first refusal.
(c) Access to per-pupil facilities aid to
charter schools to provide the schools
with funding that is dedicated solely to
charter school facilities.
(d) Access to credit enhancements
and other subsidies.
(e) Access to bonds or mill levies by
charter schools, or by other public
entities for the benefit of charter
schools.
(f) Planning for facility acquisition by
charter schools, including
comprehensive analysis of facility
needs.
To meet this priority, an applicant
must propose to disseminate bestpractices information in multiple
locations in at least two States with a
charter school law.
Proposed Priority 4—Empowering
Underserved Students and Their
Families to Choose a High-Quality
Education that Meets Their Unique
Needs.
Background: One of the statutory
purposes of the CSP is to expand
opportunities for children with
disabilities, English learners, and other
traditionally underserved students to
attend charter schools and meet
challenging State academic standards.
This priority is intended to target
funding to projects that help provide
educational choice to these underserved
student groups, which include
educationally disadvantaged children,
students who reside or attend schools in
Qualifed Opportunity Zones (i.e.,
designated distressed communities),
students who are Native American, and
students who are served by rural local
educational agencies.
An applicant addressing this
proposed priority would describe how
its proposed project is designed to
increase access to charter schools for
one or more of these groups. An
applicant might address this priority, for
instance: (1) Through its plan to
develop, identify, or expand best
practices related to serving students in
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
one or more of these underserved
groups; (2) through disseminating best
practices in areas with high
concentrations of one or more of these
student groups; or (3) by targeting its
project work in areas in which students
in one or more of the student groups are
at risk of educational failure or
otherwise in need of special assistance
or support.
Proposed Priority: Projects that are
designed to address increasing access to
charter schools for one or more of the
following groups of children or
students:
(a) Educationally disadvantaged
children.
(b) Children or students who reside or
attend school in a Qualified
Opportunity Zone, as designated by the
Secretary of the Treasury under section
1400Z–1 of the Internal Revenue Code,
as amended by the Tax Cuts and Jobs
Act.
(c) Students who are Native
Americans. Specifically, projects
serving students in this category must
focus on addressing the unique
educational needs of Native American
students, such as through the use of
instructional programs and teaching
methods that reflect and preserve Native
American language, culture, and
history.
(d) Children or students in
communities served by rural local
educational agencies.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a
competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each
priority as absolute, competitive
preference, or invitational through a
notice in the Federal Register. The
effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute
priority, we consider only applications
that meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority:
Under a competitive preference priority,
we give competitive preference to an
application by (1) awarding additional
points, depending on the extent to
which the application meets the priority
(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting
an application that meets the priority
over an application of comparable merit
that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an
invitational priority, we are particularly
interested in applications that meet the
priority. However, we do not give an
application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34
CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Dec 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
Proposed Requirements
Background: In an effort to improve
project outcomes, the Department is
proposing requirements that are
necessary for the proper consideration
of applications for National
Dissemination Grants in order to
increase the likelihood of success of
applicants’ proposed projects. In
disseminating best practices regarding
charter schools, grantees would
contribute to the efficient use of
taxpayer dollars in supporting the
charter school sector and increasing the
number of high-quality charter schools
available to our Nation’s students. We
also propose eligibility requirements, to
ensure that grantees have the
preparation and experience to
implement a National Dissemination
Grant successfully.
Proposed Requirements: We propose
the following requirements for this
program. We may apply one or more of
these requirements in any year in which
this program is administered.
Applicants for funds under this
program must address one or more of
the following application requirements:
(a) Provide a project plan, including a
logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1),
that describes the purpose of the project;
includes clearly specified, measurable
project objectives that are aligned with
the project purpose; and includes the
specific strategies and initiatives that
will be implemented to accomplish
project objectives. For each project
objective, the project plan must include
one or more of the following—
(i) Inputs and Resources:
Identification of the specific costs that
will be allocated to the proposed
project. These costs must represent the
inputs and resources (e.g., personnel,
contracted services, supplies, and
equipment) that are necessary to
generate and support grant project
activities, and are necessary to produce
project outputs. Applicants must ensure
that the total project costs, as identified
in this section, are consistent with U.S.
Department of Education Budget
Information Non-Construction Programs
Form 524, 34 CFR 75.210 and responses
to applicable selection criteria;
(ii) Project Activities: Identification of
the specific activities proposed to be
funded under the grant; the estimated
cost of those activities under the grant
project; and how these activities are
linked to the target grant project outputs
and outcomes;
(iii) Project Outputs: Identification of
the specific project deliverables, work
products, and other outputs of the
proposed project, including the cost of
those outputs (if not already itemized in
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
83865
response to paragraph (a)(ii) Project
Activities). Examples of outputs
include—
(1) Best practice publications and
products;
(2) Evaluation reports; and
(3) Presentation of a session at a
conference delivering best practices for
stakeholders.
(iv) Project Outcomes: Identification
of the anticipated project outcomes or
effects as a result of the proposed
project.
(b) Provide a management plan that
describes clearly defined
responsibilities, timelines, and
milestones for executing the project and
achieving project outcomes.
(c) Provide a dissemination plan that
includes the number and description of
States, charter schools, or authorized
public chartering agencies to which
best-practices information will be
disseminated, as well as a description of
the mechanisms the applicant will use
to disseminate information on its
proposed projects.
(d) Provide an evaluation plan that
includes performance measures that are
aligned to the project purpose, project
objectives, and project outcomes as well
as to the intended outcomes of the
proposed project.
Proposed Eligibility Requirements:
Eligibility for a grant under this
competition is limited to SEAs; State
charter school authorizing boards; State
Governors; charter school support
organizations; authorized public
chartering agencies; and public and
private nonprofit organizations that
operate, manage, or support charter
schools.
Eligible applicants may apply as a
partnership or consortium and, if so
applying, must comply with the
requirements for group applications set
forth in 34 CFR 75.127–129.
Public and private nonprofit
organizations that operate, manage, or
support charter schools must apply in
partnership with one or more SEAs,
State charter school boards, State
Governors, charter school support
organizations, or authorized public
chartering agencies.
Proposed Funding Restrictions: Grant
funds may be used only for activities
that are related to the development,
identification, expansion, and
dissemination of information on best
practices regarding the priority to which
the applicant is responding and that are
included in the grantee’s approved
application. Grantees may not use grant
funds to conduct charter school
authorizing activities, or to open new
charter schools, or replicate or expand
existing charter schools. Grantees may
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
83866
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
not use grant funds to acquire or finance
the acquisition of a charter school
facility, including through credit
enhancement, direct lending, or
subgrants. Grantees may not use grant
funds for general organizational
operating support beyond the costs
associated with this grant project. No
more than 5 percent of grant funds may
be used for direct administration of the
grant project.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Proposed Definitions
We propose the following definitions
for this program. We may apply one or
more of these definitions in any year in
which the program is in effect.
Background: In order to ensure a
common understanding of the proposed
priorities and requirements, we propose
definitions that are critical to the policy
and statutory purposes of the National
Dissemination Grant program. We
propose these definitions to clarify
expectations for eligible entities
applying for National Dissemination
Grants and to ensure that the review
process for applications for National
Dissemination Grants remains as
transparent as possible. The proposed
definition for ‘‘rural local educational
agency’’ is based on the definition from
the Secretary’s Final Supplemental
Priorities and Definitions for
Discetionary Grant Programs published
in the Federal Register on March 2,
2018 (83 FR 9096). The proposed
definition for ‘‘educationally
disadvantaged children’’ is based on
section 1115(c)(2) of the ESEA (20
U.S.C. 6315).
Educationally disadvantaged children
means a student in one or more of the
categories described in section
1115(c)(2) of the ESEA, which include
children who are economically
disadvantaged, children with
disabilities, migrant students, English
learners, neglected or delinquent
students, homeless students, and
students who are in foster care.
Native American means an Indian
(including an Alaska Native), as defined
in section 6151(3) of the ESEA, Native
Hawaiian, or Native American Pacific
Islander.
Rural local educational agency means
an LEA that is eligible under the Small
Rural School Achievement (SRSA)
program or the Rural and Low-Income
School (RLIS) program authorized under
Title V, Part B of the ESEA. Eligible
applicants may determine whether a
particular LEA is eligible for these
programs by referring to information on
the Department’s website at https://
oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-formulagrants/rural-insular-native-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Dec 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
achievement-programs/rural-educationachievement-program/.
Final Priorities, Requirements, and
Definitions: We will announce the final
priorities, requirements, and definitions
in a document published in the Federal
Register. We will determine the final
priorities, requirements, and definitions
after considering responses to the
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions and other information
available to the Department. This
document does not preclude us from
proposing additional priorities,
requirements, 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 one or more of these
priorities, requirements, and definitions,
we invite applications through a 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
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Executive Order 12866, and that
imposes total costs greater than zero, it
must identify two deregulatory actions.
For FY 2021, any new incremental costs
associated with a new rule 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 these proposed
priorities, requirements, and definitions
only on a reasoned determination that
their benefits would justify their costs.
In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, we selected
those approaches that would maximize
net benefits. Based on the analysis that
follows, the Department believes that
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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.
entities, whose participation in this
program is voluntary, and expects that
participants would include in their
proposed budgets a request for funds to
support compliance with any costbearing requirements, if necessary. We
believe any costs associated with this
regulatory action would be outweighed
by its benefits, which include helping
ensure that CSP funds support the
dissemination of best practices on topics
critical to the charter school sector and
contribute to an increased number of
high-quality educational options
available to the Nation’s students.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
As part of its continuing effort to
reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, the Department provides the
general public and Federal agencies
with an opportunity to comment on
proposed and continuing collections of
Discussion of Potential Costs and
Benefits
The Department believes that this
proposed regulatory action would
impose minimal costs on eligible
83867
information, in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps
ensure that the public understands the
Department’s collection instructions,
respondents can provide the requested
data in the desired format, reporting
burden (time and financial resources) is
minimized, collection instruments are
clearly understood, and the Department
can properly assess the impact of
collection requirements on respondents.
The proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions contain
information collection requirements
(ICR) for the program application
package. As a result of the proposed
priorities, requirements, and definitions,
we will seek approval to use the 1894–
0006 collection and 34 CFR 75.210. In
Table 1 below, we assume 15 applicants
each spend 40 hours preparing their
applications.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 1—NATIONAL DISSEMINATION GRANTS PROGRAM INFORMATION COLLECTION STATUS
OMB control No.
Expiration
1894–0006 .............
January 31, 2021 ...
Current burden
(total hours)
0
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 priorities,
requirements, and definitions 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Dec 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
Proposed burden
(total hours)
Applicants: 600 hours ......
Proposed action under final priorities
Obtain approval under 1894–0006.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Certification: The Secretary certifies that
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. Nonprofit institutions
are defined as small entities if they are
independently owned and operated and
not dominant in their field of operation.
Participation in this program is
voluntary and limited to entities seeking
to disseminate best-practice information
regarding charter schools. The
Department anticipates that
approximately 15 entities will apply for
National Dissemination Grants in a
given year and estimates that fewer than
half of these entities will be small
entities. For this limited number of
small entities, any cost-bearing
requirements imposed by this regulatory
action can be defrayed with grant funds,
as discussed in the Regulatory Impact
Analysis section of this document.
Intergovernmental Review: This
program is subject to Executive Order
12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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: On request to the
program contact person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
individuals with disabilities can obtain
this document in an accessible format.
The Department will provide the
requestor with an accessible format that
may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or
text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3
file, braille, large print, audiotape, or
compact disc, or other accessible format.
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.
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
83868
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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.
Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and
Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2020–28411 Filed 12–22–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2020–0589; FRL–10017–
39–Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Stationary
Sources; New Source Review Updates
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
revisions to the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality’s (ADEQ)
portion of the Arizona State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions are primarily intended to
make corrections to the ADEQ’s SIPapproved rules for the issuance of New
Source Review (NSR) permits for
stationary sources under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act). This proposed action
will update the ADEQ’s NSR rules in
the SIP and correct the remaining
deficiencies in the ADEQ’s NSR
program that we identified in final EPA
rulemaking actions in 2015 and 2016.
Additionally, we are proposing a
finding that the ADEQ’s SIP-approved
NSR permitting program meets
requirements for visibility protection for
major NSR sources under the Act and
are proposing to remove Federal
Implementation Plans (FIPs) related to
these requirements. We are seeking
comment on our proposed action and
plan to follow with a final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 22, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2020–0589 at https://
www.regulations.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish
any comment received to its public
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Dec 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information the disclosure of
which 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,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets. If you need
assistance in a language other than
English or if you are a person with
disabilities who needs a reasonable
accommodation at no cost to you, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa
Beckham, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone:
(415) 972–3811 or by email at
beckham.lisa@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittals
A. What did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of the rules in
the Arizona SIP?
C. What is the purpose of the submittals?
II. The EPA’s Evaluation
A. How is the EPA evaluating the
submittals?
B. Do the submittals meet the evaluation
criteria for NSR programs?
C. Evaluation of Rules Requested To Be
Removed From the SIP
D. Approval of Program for Visibility
Protection in Class I Areas
E. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria
under Sections 110(a)(2)(A),
110(a)(2)(E)(i), 110(l), and 193 of the
Clean Air Act?
F. Conclusion
III. Public Comment and Proposed Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Definitions
For this document, we are giving
meaning to certain words or initials as
follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA
mean or refer to the Clean Air Act,
unless the context indicates otherwise.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(ii) The initials ADEQ mean or refer
to the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
(iii) The initials ARS mean or refer to
the Arizona Revised Statutes.
(iv) The initials CBI mean or refer to
confidential business information.
(v) The initials CFR mean or refer to
Code of Federal Regulations.
(vi) The words EPA, we, us or our
mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
(vii) The initials FIP mean or refer to
Federal Implementation Plan.
(viii) The initials MMBtu/hr mean or
refer to million British thermal units per
hour.
(ix) The initials NAAQS mean or refer
to National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
(x) The initials NESHAP mean or refer
to National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants.
(xi) The initials NNSR mean or refer
to Nonattainment New Source Review.
(xii) The initals NO2 mean or refer to
nitrogen dioxide.
(xiii) The initials NOX mean or refer
to oxides of nitrogen.
(xiv) The initials NSPS mean or refer
to New Source Performance Statndards.
(xv) The initials NSR mean or refer to
New Source Review.
(xvi) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer
to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than or
equal to 2.5 micrometers (fine
particulate matter).
(xvii) The initials PSD mean or refer
to Prevention of Significant
Deterioration.
(xviii) The initials SIP mean or refer
to State Implementation Plan.
(xix) The initials SO2 mean or refer to
sulfur dioxide.
(xx) The words State or Arizona mean
the State of Arizona, unless the context
indicates otherwise.
(xxi) The initials TSD mean or refer to
the technical support document for this
action, unless the context indicates
otherwise.
I. The State’s Submittals
A. What did the State submit?
The ADEQ is the governor’s designee
for submitting official revisions of the
Arizona SIP to the EPA. This proposal
evaluates three SIP revisions submitted
by the ADEQ on March 29, 2019,1
January 14, 2020, and July 22, 2020.2
1 This submittal was transmitted with a cover
letter dated March 20, 2019 from Timothy S.
Franquist, Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ to
Michael Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX.
2 This submittal was made via the EPA’s eSIP
submission system—State Plan electronic
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 23, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 83862-83868]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28411]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED-2020-OESE-0172]
Proposed Priorities, Requirements, and Definitions--Expanding
Opportunity Through Quality Charter Schools Program (CSP)--National
Dissemination Grants
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education
proposes priorities, requirements, and definitions for the Expanding
Opportunity Through Quality Charter Schools Program (CSP)--National
Dissemination Grants, Assistance Listing Number 84.282T. We may use one
or more of these priorities, requirements, and definitions for
competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2021 and later years. We take this
action to ensure that CSP National Dissemination Grants are aligned
with the statutory purposes of the CSP and address key national policy
issues. Specifically, the proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions focus on disseminating best practices for strengthening
charter school authorizing and oversight; improving charter school
access to facilities and facility financing; increasing educational
choice for students with disabilities, English learners, and other
traditionally underserved student groups, including Native American
students and students in rural communities.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before January 22, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
[[Page 83863]]
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 priorities,
requirements, and definitions, address them to Cheryl Ford, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E207,
Washington, DC 20202-5970.
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: Cheryl Ford, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E207, Washington, DC 20202-
5970. Telephone: (202) 401-1366. 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 priorities, requirements, and definitions. To ensure that
your comments have maximum effect in developing the notice of final
priorities, requirements, and definitions, we urge you to identify
clearly the specific section of the proposed priority, requirement, 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 priorities, requirements, and definitions. 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.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions
by accessing Regulations.gov. Due to the current COVID-19 public health
emergency, the Department buildings are not open to the public.
However, upon reopening, you may also inspect the comments in person at
400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E207, 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.
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 priorities, requirements, and
definitions. 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 major purposes of the CSP are to expand
opportunities for all students, particularly traditionally underserved
students, to attend charter schools and meet challenging State academic
standards; provide financial assistance for the planning, program
design, and initial implementation of charter schools; increase the
number of high-quality charter schools available to students across the
United States; evaluate the impact of charter schools on student
achievement, families, and communities; share best practices between
charter schools and other public schools; encourage States to provide
facilities support to charter schools; and support efforts to
strengthen the charter school authorizing process.
Through CSP National Dissemination Grants, the Department provides
funds on a competitive basis to support efforts by eligible entities to
help increase the number of high-quality charter schools available to
our Nation's students by disseminating best practices regarding charter
schools.
Program Authority: Section 4305(a)(3)(B) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C.
7221d(a)(3)(B).
Background: The Department last conducted a National Dissemination
Grants competition in FY 2018. In that competition, we invited
applications for projects designed to disseminate best practices for
strengthening charter school authorizing and oversight or improving
charter school access to facilities and facility financing, both key
policy issues facing charter schools on a national scale. This document
proposes similar priorities, requirements, and definitions as the last
competition in order to continue to address these key policy issues.
These priorities, requirements, and definitions take into consideration
the continuing growth of charter schools across the Nation and the
increasing need to support the capacity and oversight of all charter
schools. The priorities also recognize the important role that charter
schools can play in increasing educational choice for students with
disabilities, English learners, and other traditionally underserved
student groups including Native American students and students in rural
communities.
Proposed Priorities
This document contains four proposed priorities. These priorities
are:
Proposed Priority 1--Strengthening Charter School Authorizing and
Oversight.
Background: One of the statutory purposes of the CSP is to support
efforts to strengthen the charter school authorizing process to improve
performance management, including transparency, oversight and
monitoring (including financial audits), and evaluation of charter
schools. Also, the CSP supports quality, accountability, and
transparency in the operational performance of all authorized public
chartering agencies, including State educational agencies (SEAs), local
educational agencies (LEAs), and other authorizing entities.
Specifically, the CSP State Entity Grants program has a strong focus on
authorizing, including a requirement that grantees reserve a portion of
funds to provide technical assistance to authorized public chartering
agencies and work with them to improve authorizing quality. This
priority would support that emphasis by prioritizing projects that
propose to develop, identify, or expand, and disseminate information on
best practices in authorizing and the oversight of charter schools by
authorized public chartering agencies.
Authorizers are responsible for conducting rigorous application
reviews to ensure new charter schools can be of high quality. They are
also responsible for establishing clear and consistent policies to hold
schools accountable for
[[Page 83864]]
meeting their academic, financial, and operational performance goals,
as well as complying with all applicable laws--including civil rights
laws requiring equal access. Through this priority, the Department
expects that the implementation of strong authorizing practices will
proliferate and continuously improve the quality of the charter school
sector.
Proposed Priority: Projects that are designed to develop, identify,
or expand, and disseminate information on best practices in authorizing
and overseeing charter schools by authorized public chartering agencies
in one or more of the following areas:
(a) Conducting charter school application reviews.
(b) Establishing governance standards and practices for charter
schools.
(c) Promoting and monitoring the compliance of charter schools and
authorized public chartering agencies with Federal, State, and local
academic, financial, governance, operational (including school safety),
or other applicable requirements.
(d) Evaluating the performance of charter schools or authorized
public chartering agencies.
(e) Facilitating the replication and expansion of high-quality
charter schools.
(f) Improving the academic, financial, or operational performance
of charter schools.
(g) Closing persistently underperforming charter schools.
To meet this priority, an applicant must propose to disseminate
best-practices information in multiple locations in at least two States
with a charter school law.
Proposed Priority 2--Targeting Educational Agencies with the Most
Need.
Background: This priority would target information dissemination
efforts toward those entities with the greatest need, which include
States with new or significantly revised charter school laws or
policies.
To increase opportunities for authorized public chartering agencies
to establish new, high-quality operational procedures, and because the
period following enactment or revision of charter school laws and
policies is most critical to their successful implementation, this
priority would focus on States where new or revised charter school laws
and policies have been adopted within the last five years. In addition,
the priority would target dissemination efforts to aid the development
of authorized public chartering agencies that support 10 or fewer
schools and, accordingly, have limited resources related to economies
of scale, or include struggling schools under their purview.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ National Organization of Charter School Authorizers(NACSA).
(2009). A Report on NACSA's Authorizer Survey. Chicago: National
Organization of Charter School Authorizers. Retrieved from
www.qualitycharters.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/NACSA_2008-SOCA.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through this priority, the Department would support projects that
target information on best practices to improve the overall quality of,
and the ability of State entities to grow, the charter school sector
within their States.
Proposed Priority: Projects that propose to target information
dissemination to one or more of the following:
(a) States that have enacted laws in the last five years allowing
charter schools to open.
(b) States that in the last five years have significantly changed
their laws, regulations, or policies regarding authorizing or oversight
of charter schools by authorized public chartering agencies.
(c) Authorized public chartering agencies with fewer than 10
charter schools.
(d) Authorized public chartering agencies that authorize a
significant number of charter schools experiencing significant low
performance or non-compliance with Federal, State, or local academic,
financial, governance, operational (including school safety), or other
applicable requirements.
Proposed Priority 3--Improving Charter School Access to Facilities
and Facility Financing.
Background: Limited access to adequate facilities and to funding
for facilities, including per-pupil facilities aid, remains a
significant issue impacting growth in the number of charter schools
available to students throughout the United States. To help address
this issue, this priority would support projects that develop,
identify, or expand, and disseminate information on, best practices in
supporting charter schools in accessing and financing facilities.
Proposed Priority: Projects that are designed to develop, identify,
or expand, and disseminate information on, best practices in supporting
charter schools in accessing and financing facilities, including in one
or more of the following areas:
(a) Access to public and private (including philanthropic) funding,
including from a Qualified Opportunity Fund under section 1400Z-2 of
the Internal Revenue Code, as amended by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (115
Pub. L. 97), for one or more of the following, as needed to open or to
replicate or expand a charter school:
(1) The acquisition (by purchase, lease, donation, or otherwise) of
an interest (including an interest held by a third party for the
benefit of the school) in improved or unimproved real property.
(2) The construction of new facilities, or the renovation, repair,
or alteration of existing facilities.
(3) The predevelopment costs required to assess sites for purposes
of paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this priority.
(4) The acquisition of other tangible property.
(b) Access to public facilities, including the right of first
refusal.
(c) Access to per-pupil facilities aid to charter schools to
provide the schools with funding that is dedicated solely to charter
school facilities.
(d) Access to credit enhancements and other subsidies.
(e) Access to bonds or mill levies by charter schools, or by other
public entities for the benefit of charter schools.
(f) Planning for facility acquisition by charter schools, including
comprehensive analysis of facility needs.
To meet this priority, an applicant must propose to disseminate
best-practices information in multiple locations in at least two States
with a charter school law.
Proposed Priority 4--Empowering Underserved Students and Their
Families to Choose a High-Quality Education that Meets Their Unique
Needs.
Background: One of the statutory purposes of the CSP is to expand
opportunities for children with disabilities, English learners, and
other traditionally underserved students to attend charter schools and
meet challenging State academic standards. This priority is intended to
target funding to projects that help provide educational choice to
these underserved student groups, which include educationally
disadvantaged children, students who reside or attend schools in
Qualifed Opportunity Zones (i.e., designated distressed communities),
students who are Native American, and students who are served by rural
local educational agencies.
An applicant addressing this proposed priority would describe how
its proposed project is designed to increase access to charter schools
for one or more of these groups. An applicant might address this
priority, for instance: (1) Through its plan to develop, identify, or
expand best practices related to serving students in
[[Page 83865]]
one or more of these underserved groups; (2) through disseminating best
practices in areas with high concentrations of one or more of these
student groups; or (3) by targeting its project work in areas in which
students in one or more of the student groups are at risk of
educational failure or otherwise in need of special assistance or
support.
Proposed Priority: Projects that are designed to address increasing
access to charter schools for one or more of the following groups of
children or students:
(a) Educationally disadvantaged children.
(b) Children or students who reside or attend school in a Qualified
Opportunity Zone, as designated by the Secretary of the Treasury under
section 1400Z-1 of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended by the Tax
Cuts and Jobs Act.
(c) Students who are Native Americans. Specifically, projects
serving students in this category must focus on addressing the unique
educational needs of Native American students, such as through the use
of instructional programs and teaching methods that reflect and
preserve Native American language, culture, and history.
(d) Children or students in communities served by rural local
educational agencies.
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Proposed Requirements
Background: In an effort to improve project outcomes, the
Department is proposing requirements that are necessary for the proper
consideration of applications for National Dissemination Grants in
order to increase the likelihood of success of applicants' proposed
projects. In disseminating best practices regarding charter schools,
grantees would contribute to the efficient use of taxpayer dollars in
supporting the charter school sector and increasing the number of high-
quality charter schools available to our Nation's students. We also
propose eligibility requirements, to ensure that grantees have the
preparation and experience to implement a National Dissemination Grant
successfully.
Proposed Requirements: We propose the following requirements for
this program. We may apply one or more of these requirements in any
year in which this program is administered.
Applicants for funds under this program must address one or more of
the following application requirements:
(a) Provide a project plan, including a logic model (as defined in
34 CFR 77.1), that describes the purpose of the project; includes
clearly specified, measurable project objectives that are aligned with
the project purpose; and includes the specific strategies and
initiatives that will be implemented to accomplish project objectives.
For each project objective, the project plan must include one or more
of the following--
(i) Inputs and Resources: Identification of the specific costs that
will be allocated to the proposed project. These costs must represent
the inputs and resources (e.g., personnel, contracted services,
supplies, and equipment) that are necessary to generate and support
grant project activities, and are necessary to produce project outputs.
Applicants must ensure that the total project costs, as identified in
this section, are consistent with U.S. Department of Education Budget
Information Non-Construction Programs Form 524, 34 CFR 75.210 and
responses to applicable selection criteria;
(ii) Project Activities: Identification of the specific activities
proposed to be funded under the grant; the estimated cost of those
activities under the grant project; and how these activities are linked
to the target grant project outputs and outcomes;
(iii) Project Outputs: Identification of the specific project
deliverables, work products, and other outputs of the proposed project,
including the cost of those outputs (if not already itemized in
response to paragraph (a)(ii) Project Activities). Examples of outputs
include--
(1) Best practice publications and products;
(2) Evaluation reports; and
(3) Presentation of a session at a conference delivering best
practices for stakeholders.
(iv) Project Outcomes: Identification of the anticipated project
outcomes or effects as a result of the proposed project.
(b) Provide a management plan that describes clearly defined
responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for executing the project
and achieving project outcomes.
(c) Provide a dissemination plan that includes the number and
description of States, charter schools, or authorized public chartering
agencies to which best-practices information will be disseminated, as
well as a description of the mechanisms the applicant will use to
disseminate information on its proposed projects.
(d) Provide an evaluation plan that includes performance measures
that are aligned to the project purpose, project objectives, and
project outcomes as well as to the intended outcomes of the proposed
project.
Proposed Eligibility Requirements: Eligibility for a grant under
this competition is limited to SEAs; State charter school authorizing
boards; State Governors; charter school support organizations;
authorized public chartering agencies; and public and private nonprofit
organizations that operate, manage, or support charter schools.
Eligible applicants may apply as a partnership or consortium and,
if so applying, must comply with the requirements for group
applications set forth in 34 CFR 75.127-129.
Public and private nonprofit organizations that operate, manage, or
support charter schools must apply in partnership with one or more
SEAs, State charter school boards, State Governors, charter school
support organizations, or authorized public chartering agencies.
Proposed Funding Restrictions: Grant funds may be used only for
activities that are related to the development, identification,
expansion, and dissemination of information on best practices regarding
the priority to which the applicant is responding and that are included
in the grantee's approved application. Grantees may not use grant funds
to conduct charter school authorizing activities, or to open new
charter schools, or replicate or expand existing charter schools.
Grantees may
[[Page 83866]]
not use grant funds to acquire or finance the acquisition of a charter
school facility, including through credit enhancement, direct lending,
or subgrants. Grantees may not use grant funds for general
organizational operating support beyond the costs associated with this
grant project. No more than 5 percent of grant funds may be used for
direct administration of the grant project.
Proposed Definitions
We propose the following definitions for this program. We may apply
one or more of these definitions in any year in which the program is in
effect.
Background: In order to ensure a common understanding of the
proposed priorities and requirements, we propose definitions that are
critical to the policy and statutory purposes of the National
Dissemination Grant program. We propose these definitions to clarify
expectations for eligible entities applying for National Dissemination
Grants and to ensure that the review process for applications for
National Dissemination Grants remains as transparent as possible. The
proposed definition for ``rural local educational agency'' is based on
the definition from the Secretary's Final Supplemental Priorities and
Definitions for Discetionary Grant Programs published in the Federal
Register on March 2, 2018 (83 FR 9096). The proposed definition for
``educationally disadvantaged children'' is based on section 1115(c)(2)
of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6315).
Educationally disadvantaged children means a student in one or more
of the categories described in section 1115(c)(2) of the ESEA, which
include children who are economically disadvantaged, children with
disabilities, migrant students, English learners, neglected or
delinquent students, homeless students, and students who are in foster
care.
Native American means an Indian (including an Alaska Native), as
defined in section 6151(3) of the ESEA, Native Hawaiian, or Native
American Pacific Islander.
Rural local educational agency means an LEA that is eligible under
the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program or the Rural and Low-
Income School (RLIS) program authorized under Title V, Part B of the
ESEA. Eligible applicants may determine whether a particular LEA is
eligible for these programs by referring to information on the
Department's website at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-formula-grants/rural-insular-native-achievement-programs/rural-education-achievement-program/.
Final Priorities, Requirements, and Definitions: We will announce
the final priorities, requirements, and definitions in a document
published in the Federal Register. We will determine the final
priorities, requirements, and definitions after considering responses
to the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions and other
information available to the Department. This document does not
preclude us from proposing additional priorities, requirements,
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 one or more of these priorities, requirements,
and definitions, we invite applications through a 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 2021, any new incremental costs associated
with a new rule 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 these proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions only on a reasoned determination that their benefits would
justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize net
benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes
that
[[Page 83867]]
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.
Discussion of Potential Costs and Benefits
The Department believes that this proposed regulatory action would
impose minimal costs on eligible entities, whose participation in this
program is voluntary, and expects that participants would include in
their proposed budgets a request for funds to support compliance with
any cost-bearing requirements, if necessary. We believe any costs
associated with this regulatory action would be outweighed by its
benefits, which include helping ensure that CSP funds support the
dissemination of best practices on topics critical to the charter
school sector and contribute to an increased number of high-quality
educational options available to the Nation's students.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, the Department provides the general public and Federal agencies
with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collections
of information, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps ensure that the public
understands the Department's collection instructions, respondents can
provide the requested data in the desired format, reporting burden
(time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are
clearly understood, and the Department can properly assess the impact
of collection requirements on respondents.
The proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions contain
information collection requirements (ICR) for the program application
package. As a result of the proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions, we will seek approval to use the 1894-0006 collection and
34 CFR 75.210. In Table 1 below, we assume 15 applicants each spend 40
hours preparing their applications.
Table 1--National Dissemination Grants Program Information Collection Status
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed action
OMB control No. Expiration Current burden Proposed burden under final
(total hours) (total hours) priorities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1894-0006.................. January 31, 2021........... 0 Applicants: 600 Obtain approval
hours. under 1894-0006.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
priorities, requirements, and definitions 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 Certification: The Secretary certifies
that 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. Nonprofit
institutions are defined as small entities if they are independently
owned and operated and not dominant in their field of operation.
Participation in this program is voluntary and limited to entities
seeking to disseminate best-practice information regarding charter
schools. The Department anticipates that approximately 15 entities will
apply for National Dissemination Grants in a given year and estimates
that fewer than half of these entities will be small entities. For this
limited number of small entities, any cost-bearing requirements imposed
by this regulatory action can be defrayed with grant funds, as
discussed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis section of this document.
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: On request to the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
can obtain this document in an accessible format. The Department will
provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich
Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file,
braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible
format.
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.
[[Page 83868]]
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.
Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2020-28411 Filed 12-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P