Calculation of the Endowment Factor for Allocations to Historically Black Colleges and Universities Under Section 314(a)(2)(A) of the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021, 21190-21195 [2021-08379]
Download as PDF
21190
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
and over 2.2 million confirmed cases in
Mexico.6
Notice of Action
Given the outbreak and continued
transmission and spread of COVID–19
within the United States and globally,
the Secretary has determined that the
risk of continued transmission and
spread of the virus associated with
COVID–19 between the United States
and Mexico poses an ongoing ‘‘specific
threat to human life or national
interests.’’
U.S. and Mexican officials have
mutually determined that non-essential
travel between the United States and
Mexico poses additional risk of
transmission and spread of the virus
associated with COVID–19 and places
the populace of both nations at
increased risk of contracting the virus
associated with COVID–19. Moreover,
given the sustained human-to-human
transmission of the virus, returning to
previous levels of travel between the
two nations places the personnel
staffing land ports of entry between the
United States and Mexico, as well as the
individuals traveling through these
ports of entry, at increased risk of
exposure to the virus associated with
COVID–19. Accordingly, and consistent
with the authority granted in 19 U.S.C.
1318(b)(1)(C) and (b)(2),7 I have
determined that land ports of entry
along the U.S.-Mexico border will
continue to suspend normal operations
and will only allow processing for entry
into the United States of those travelers
engaged in ‘‘essential travel,’’ as defined
6 Id.
7 19 U.S.C. 1318(b)(1)(C) provides that
‘‘[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of the Treasury, when necessary to
respond to a national emergency declared under the
National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)
or to a specific threat to human life or national
interests,’’ is authorized to ‘‘[t]ake any . . . action
that may be necessary to respond directly to the
national emergency or specific threat.’’ On March
1, 2003, certain functions of the Secretary of the
Treasury were transferred to the Secretary of
Homeland Security. See 6 U.S.C. 202(2), 203(1).
Under 6 U.S.C. 212(a)(1), authorities ‘‘related to
Customs revenue functions’’ were reserved to the
Secretary of the Treasury. To the extent that any
authority under section 1318(b)(1) was reserved to
the Secretary of the Treasury, it has been delegated
to the Secretary of Homeland Security. See Treas.
Dep’t Order No. 100–16 (May 15, 2003), 68 FR
28322 (May 23, 2003). Additionally, 19 U.S.C.
1318(b)(2) provides that ‘‘[n]otwithstanding any
other provision of law, the Commissioner of U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, when necessary to
respond to a specific threat to human life or
national interests, is authorized to close temporarily
any Customs office or port of entry or take any other
lesser action that may be necessary to respond to
the specific threat.’’ Congress has vested in the
Secretary of Homeland Security the ‘‘functions of
all officers, employees, and organizational units of
the Department,’’ including the Commissioner of
CBP. 6 U.S.C. 112(a)(3).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:24 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
below. Given the definition of ‘‘essential
travel’’ below, this temporary alteration
in land ports of entry operations should
not interrupt legitimate trade between
the two nations or disrupt critical
supply chains that ensure food, fuel,
medicine, and other critical materials
reach individuals on both sides of the
border.
For purposes of the temporary
alteration in certain designated ports of
entry operations authorized under 19
U.S.C. 1318(b)(1)(C) and (b)(2), travel
through the land ports of entry and ferry
terminals along the United StatesMexico border shall be limited to
‘‘essential travel,’’ which includes, but
is not limited to—
• U.S. citizens and lawful permanent
residents returning to the United States;
• Individuals traveling for medical
purposes (e.g., to receive medical
treatment in the United States);
• Individuals traveling to attend
educational institutions;
• Individuals traveling to work in the
United States (e.g., individuals working
in the farming or agriculture industry
who must travel between the United
States and Mexico in furtherance of
such work);
• Individuals traveling for emergency
response and public health purposes
(e.g., government officials or emergency
responders entering the United States to
support federal, state, local, tribal, or
territorial government efforts to respond
to COVID–19 or other emergencies);
• Individuals engaged in lawful crossborder trade (e.g., truck drivers
supporting the movement of cargo
between the United States and Mexico);
• Individuals engaged in official
government travel or diplomatic travel;
• Members of the U.S. Armed Forces,
and the spouses and children of
members of the U.S. Armed Forces,
returning to the United States; and
• Individuals engaged in militaryrelated travel or operations.
The following travel does not fall
within the definition of ‘‘essential
travel’’ for purposes of this
Notification—
• Individuals traveling for tourism
purposes (e.g., sightseeing, recreation,
gambling, or attending cultural events).
At this time, this Notification does not
apply to air, freight rail, or sea travel
between the United States and Mexico,
but does apply to passenger rail,
passenger ferry travel, and pleasure boat
travel between the United States and
Mexico. These restrictions are
temporary in nature and shall remain in
effect until 11:59 p.m. EDT on May 21,
2021. This Notification may be amended
or rescinded prior to that time, based on
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
circumstances associated with the
specific threat.8
The Commissioner of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) is hereby
directed to prepare and distribute
appropriate guidance to CBP personnel
on the continued implementation of the
temporary measures set forth in this
Notification. The CBP Commissioner
may determine that other forms of
travel, such as travel in furtherance of
economic stability or social order,
constitute ‘‘essential travel’’ under this
Notification. Further, the CBP
Commissioner may, on an
individualized basis and for
humanitarian reasons or for other
purposes in the national interest, permit
the processing of travelers to the United
States not engaged in ‘‘essential travel.’’
Alejandro N. Mayorkas,
Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland
Security.
[FR Doc. 2021–08485 Filed 4–21–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9112–FP–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Part 677
RIN 1840–AD63
Calculation of the Endowment Factor
for Allocations to Historically Black
Colleges and Universities Under
Section 314(a)(2)(A) of the Coronavirus
Response and Relief Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2021
Office of Postsecondary
Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final regulations.
AGENCY:
The Department of Education
(Department) issues this final rule so
that it may determine final allocations
to Historically Black Colleges and
Universities (HBCUs) awarded under
section 314(a)(2) of the Coronavirus
Response and Relief Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2021 (CRRSAA).
DATES: These regulations are effective
April 22, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen Epps, Office of Postsecondary
Education, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Ave. SW,
Room 2B133, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 453–6337. Email:
Karen.Epps@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
SUMMARY:
8 DHS is working closely with counterparts in
Mexico and Canada to identify appropriate public
health conditions to safely ease restrictions in the
future and support U.S. border communities.
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Service (FRS), toll-free, at (800) 877–
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The CRRSAA was enacted on
December 27, 2020, to help Americans
cope with the ongoing economic and
health crises created by the novel
coronavirus disease (COVID–19)
outbreak. Section 314 of the CRRSAA
authorizes supplemental awards to
institutions of higher education (IHEs)
through the Higher Education
Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF)
initially established by section 18004 of
the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security (CARES) Act (March
27, 2020). Section 314 of the CRRSAA
also authorizes, in paragraph (a)(2)(A),
additional awards to HBCUs eligible to
receive assistance under two programs
authorized by the Higher Education Act
of 1965, as amended (HEA): The
Strengthening HBCUs program
authorized by part B of title III of the
HEA, and the HBCU Masters program
authorized by subpart 4 of part A of title
VII of the HEA. Section 314 further
specifies, in paragraph (a)(2), the
amounts available for these additional
awards and, in paragraph (a)(2)(A), the
three-part formula for determining the
allocations to each eligible HBCU.
This formula calls for the allocation
of—
(1) 70 percent of funds according to a
ratio equivalent to the number of Pell
Grant recipients in attendance at the
institution at the end of the school year
preceding the beginning of the most
recent fiscal year and the total number
of Pell Grant recipients at all such
institutions;
(2) 20 percent of funds according to a
ratio equivalent to the total number of
students enrolled at the institution at
the end of the school year preceding the
beginning of that fiscal year and the
number of students enrolled at all such
institutions; and
(3) 10 percent of funds according to a
ratio equivalent to the total endowment
size at all eligible institutions at the end
of the school year preceding the
beginning of that fiscal year and the
total endowment size at the institution.
The first two elements for
determining allocations to HBCUs under
section 314(a)(2)(A) of the CRRSAA
reflect a familiar and straightforward
methodology: Institutions receive a
share of funds commensurate with their
respective shares of Pell Grant
recipients and total overall enrollment
at all eligible institutions. However, the
third element, also known as the
endowment factor, calls for allocating
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
10 percent of funds based on an inverse
proportion of an institution’s share of
the total endowment funding at all
eligible institutions. In other words,
institutions with the smallest
endowments receive the largest share of
funds. This inverse proportion formula
reflects the intent of Congress to direct
additional funding to institutions
unable to tap endowment resources to
meet needs arising from the COVID–19
pandemic. Such institutions often have
smaller enrollments or serve highly
disadvantaged populations;
consequently, they have not been able to
build up significant endowment funds
over time that might have been used to
respond to the COVID–19-related
disruptions to teaching and learning on
campus.
In fact, some institutions reported an
endowment value of zero, which
contributed to the circumstances
requiring this final rule. Specifically,
endowment data collected by the
Department for the purpose of
determining the allocation of funds
through the endowment factor showed
that, of 97 eligible institutions, nine
reported an endowment value of zero.
While it seems clear that Congress
intended for such institutions to receive
the largest share of endowment factor
funding because of their complete lack
of endowment resources to call upon in
responding to the COVID–19 pandemic,
it is not possible to generate the
endowment ratios described in section
314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the CRRSAA for
these schools due to the mathematic
principle that division by zero yields an
undefined result and thus has no
meaning. Therefore, it would be
impossible to implement this formula in
a manner consistent with the statutory
text for certain eligible entities.
Excluding these schools entirely from
the endowment factor calculation would
seem contrary to the plain language of
the statute, as the Act does not expressly
exclude these entities and is meant to
include all eligible institutions under
part B of title III and subpart 4 of part
A of title VII of the HEA. Moreover,
even if the nine HBCUs with zero
endowments could be excluded from
the formula, there is a large enough gap
between the institution with the lowest
non-zero endowment and other
institutions with non-zero endowments
that the institution with the lowest nonzero endowment would garner nearly all
of the program funding ($72.8 million)
allocable through the endowment factor.
The Department does not believe such
an inequitable outcome would be
consistent with the design of the
endowment factor formula; rather, it
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21191
indicates a technical oversight in
developing the endowment factor.
In response to the inability to
implement this formula in a manner
consistent with the statutory text for
certain eligible entities, the Department
consulted with Congress to determine
options for calculating awards to HBCUs
under section 314(a)(2) of the CRRSAA.
These discussions were focused on two
goals: (1) Ensuring that all eligible
institutions with relatively low
endowment values benefited from the
endowment factor, and (2) ensuring that
the endowment factor operated as
intended, delivering significantly
greater amounts of funding to those
institutions with the smallest
endowments rather than to those
institutions with the largest
endowments. This consultation took on
additional urgency because of the
possibility that additional HEERF
appropriations for HBCUs would be
provided on the basis of the formula in
section 314(a)(2)(A) of the CRRSAA as
part of the American Rescue Plan Act of
2021 (ARP).
Ultimately, Congress provided such
additional appropriations in the ARP
and directed IHEs to make allocations in
accordance with the same terms and
conditions as those provided in section
314 of the CRRSAA, with several
exceptions. Of relevance here, Congress
established a ‘‘floor’’ on the endowment
value used when allocating the ARPprovided HEERF funds based on the
endowment factor. Section 2003(3) of
the ARP specifies that an institution
‘‘that has a total endowment size of less
than $1,000,000 (including an
institution that does not have an
endowment) shall be treated by the
Secretary as having a total endowment
size of $1,000,000’’ for the purposes of
section 314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the CRRSAA,
which is used to determine allocations
under the ARP. However, this provision
does not apply to the HEERF funds
appropriated in the CRRSAA.
Consequently, the Department
determined that the best course of
action would be to issue regulations on
the endowment factor under section
314(a)(2). In the interim, on February
26, 2021, the Department awarded 90
percent of the funds provided to HBCUs
under section 314(a)(2) of the
CRRSAA—the funds allocated on the
basis of factors 1 and 2 of the formula
in section 314(a)(2)(A).
In considering alternatives for refining
the methodology for implementing the
endowment factor, the Department
relied on analyses of options developed
both prior to and during consultation
with Congress regarding the challenges
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
21192
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
presented by the endowment factor
under the CRRSAA.
We considered exclusion of the nine
entities that reported an endowment
position of zero. As stated above, we
determined this was inconsistent with
the plain language of the statute.
Further, it would exclude the
institutions with the greatest need—i.e.,
those institutions reporting endowment
amounts of zero—while allocating
virtually all funds apportioned to the
endowment factor to just two of the 88
eligible institutions with non-zero
endowments. Such an outcome would
be contrary to the purpose of any
funding formula based on
proportionality, which is to provide
benefits to all eligible entities in
proportion to one or more
characteristics of those entities, and not
to merely direct all or nearly all
applicable funding to a few such
entities.
Given that we cannot implement the
formula in a manner consistent with the
statutory text for certain eligible entities,
we considered a variety of approaches.
A rule that imputed a small dollar
amount to the nine eligible institutions
reporting zero endowment funding,
such as $1, would result in the
allocation of nearly all funding to those
institutions, effectively preventing the
accrual of any benefits from the
endowment factor to any other eligible
institutions (approximately $8.1 million
would be awarded to each of the nine
institutions with zero endowments and
a balance of less than $1,500 would be
distributed among the remaining
eligible institutions). Again, such an
outcome would not, in the Department’s
view, be consistent with the basic equity
principles that generally underlie the
funding formulas enacted by Congress
for the many formula grant programs
administered by the Department.
The Department also explored an
option that considered the relationship
between the amount institutions receive
through the endowment factor and the
sum of that value in combination with
the institution’s reported (or imputed, in
the case of the institutions reporting $0
endowments) endowment. The
underlying principle of this approach
was that while the endowment factor
was to direct additional funding to
institutions with the smallest
endowments, such institutions should
not benefit disproportionately when
compared to other institutions with
small endowments. For example, it
would be both inequitable and
inconsistent with the design of the
endowment factor if an institution with
a reported endowment of $100,000
received $3,000,000 from the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
endowment factor—effectively
increasing its endowment-based
resources to $3,100,000—while another
institution with a reported endowment
of $1,000,000 received $500,000 from
the endowment factor, effectively
ending up with just half ($1,500,000) of
the endowment-based resources as the
first institution. In other words, no
institution’s allocation from the
endowment factor should exceed the
resources available to any other
institution based on the sum of its
allocation from the endowment factor
and its reported endowment. The
Department’s preliminary modeling of
an option based on this principle
produced an appropriately graduated
distribution of endowment factor
allocations to all 97 institutions, while
directing 72 percent of funds to the
bottom quartile of institutions ranked by
endowment size, a result that the
Department deemed both equitable and
consistent with the core purpose of the
endowment factor.
Importantly, for the purposes of this
final rule, the $1,000,000 floor
endowment amount set by Congress for
use in calculating endowment factor
allocations under the ARP yields an
equitable distribution of funds nearly
identical to that of the Department’s
‘‘imputed endowment size’’ model.
Specifically, applying the ARP’s
$1,000,000 endowment floor to the
endowment factor in the CRRSAA
would allocate $54.3 million, or 75
percent of funds, to the bottom quartile
of institutions ranked by endowment
size.
Consequently, the Department has
concluded that the equitable impact of
the $1,000,000 floor endowment
threshold adopted by Congress for the
purpose of calculating endowment
factor allocations under the ARP,
combined with its simplicity and the
benefits of a uniform approach to
determining endowment factor
allocations across the ARP and the
CRRSAA, make that same $1,000,000
endowment floor the most appropriate
manner to implement the endowment
factor formula in section
314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the CRRSAA, which
cannot otherwise be implemented in a
manner consistent with the statutory
text for certain eligible entities.
Significant Regulations
Statute: Section 314 of the CRRSAA
(division M of Public Law 116–260,
December 27, 2020) provides for
funding for eligible HBCUs.
Specifically, section 314(a)(2)(A)
specifies a three-part formula for
determining the allocations to each
eligible HBCU, including an endowment
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
factor that allocates 10 percent of the
available funding according to a ratio
equivalent to the total endowment size
at all eligible institutions at the end of
the school year preceding the beginning
of that fiscal year and the total
endowment size at the institution.
Current Regulation: None.
New Regulation: In new § 677.1, we
provide that, for the purpose of
calculating allocations under section
314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the CRRSAA, an
institution that has a total endowment
of less than $1,000,000, including an
institution that does not have an
endowment, will be treated by the
Secretary as having an endowment of
$1,000,000.
Reasons: The Department is making
this regulatory change to remedy a
technical defect in the statute; allocate
funds consistent with its best
interpretation of the statutory purpose
of the endowment factor; make the
allocation methodology related to
endowment size under the CRRSAA
consistent with the refined methodology
under the ARP; and ensure that the
endowment factor operates to equitably
deliver funding to eligible institutions
based on the relative size of their
endowments. See the Background
section for a more detailed discussion of
our reasons for this regulatory change.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking and
Delayed Effective Date Under the
Administrative Procedure Act
Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553), the
Department generally offers interested
parties the opportunity to comment on
proposed rules. However, the APA
provides that an agency is not required
to conduct notice and comment
rulemaking when the agency, for good
cause, finds that notice and public
comment thereon are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)).
Congress enacted the CRRSAA to help
Americans cope with the urgent
economic and health crises created by
the COVID–19 outbreak and created the
HEERF to provide emergency financial
aid grants to students and institutions.
Section 314(b)(2)(B) of the CRRSAA
requires the Secretary, to the extent
practicable, to make awards to HBCUs
under section 314(a)(2) by February 25,
2021. In the absence of this final rule,
the Department would be unable to
timely award the final 10 percent of
funds appropriated by Congress to
HBCUs under section 314(a)(2) of the
CRRSAA in a manner that equitably
benefits those HBCUs with limited
endowments serving large numbers or
percentages of students from low-
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
income families. In light of the urgent
economic challenges facing IHEs as a
result of the current national emergency
and the importance of awarding all
available emergency funds appropriated
by Congress as quickly as possible,
particularly to those institutions
without access to much-needed
resources that can help address the
disruption to teaching and learning
caused by the COVID–19 pandemic, it
would be impracticable and contrary to
the public interest to conduct noticeand-comment rulemaking. Accordingly,
there is good cause to waive the notice
and comment requirements of the APA.
Moreover, the APA generally requires
that regulations be published at least 30
days before their effective date, unless
the agency has good cause to implement
its regulations sooner (5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3)). As described above, good
cause exists for this rule to be effective
upon publication in light of the current
national emergency and the importance
of awarding HEERF allocations to
eligible institutions in a timely manner
consistent with statutory intent.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) must determine 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.
This final regulatory action is a
significant regulatory action subject to
review by OMB under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866. Pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801
et seq.), the Office of Information and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
Regulatory Affairs designated this rule
as not a ‘‘major rule’’, as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
We have also reviewed these
regulations under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and
explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing
regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866. To the extent
permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency—
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only
upon a reasoned determination that
their benefits justify their costs
(recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives and
taking into account—among other things
and to the extent practicable—the costs
of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, select those
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives rather than the
behavior or manner of compliance a
regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available
alternatives to direct regulation,
including economic incentives—such as
user fees or marketable permits—to
encourage the desired behavior, or
provide information that enables the
public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires
an agency ‘‘to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated
present and future benefits and costs as
accurately as possible.’’ The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ‘‘identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes.’’
We are issuing this final rule only on
a reasoned determination that its
benefits would justify its costs. In
choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those
approaches that would maximize net
benefits. Based on the analysis that
follows, the Department believes that
these regulations are consistent with the
principles in Executive Order 13563.
We have also determined that this
regulatory action would not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21193
Need for Regulatory Action
The Department is issuing this final
rule to clarify the methodology for
calculating allocations to HBCUs in
accordance with the endowment factor
described in section 314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of
the CRRSAA. The endowment factor is
intended to provide additional funding
to institutions with limited endowment
resources available to address
institutional and student needs arising
from the COVID–19 pandemic. This
final rule addresses a defect in the
statutory allocation formula and permits
the allocation of all available funds to
eligible institutions as quickly as
possible.
As detailed in the preamble of this
final rule, in light of the current national
emergency and the importance of
delivering HEERF awards to institutions
as soon as possible, notice-andcomment rulemaking would be
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest. Absent immediate
implementation of this final rule, the
Department would be unable to timely
award the remaining HBCU funding in
a manner consistent with the intent to
provide funding to eligible HBCUs
based on relative endowment size, with
a potentially serious negative impact on
both institutions and the students they
serve.
Costs, Benefits, and Transfers
As noted elsewhere in this final rule,
this regulatory change affects only the
allocation of funding under the HEERF
program. It does not impose or relieve
any regulatory or compliance burden on
regulated entities. In general, we do not
anticipate this final rule to impose any
net costs on affected entities. However,
to the extent that the receipt of funding
under this program affects the marginal
cost of administering funds, there may
be some effects on participating
institutions, but given the overall
amount of funding administered under
this program and the relatively small
amount implicated by this rule, we
expect those effects to be de minimis.
As noted above, this final rule will
allow the Department to operationalize
the statutory requirements of the
CRRSAA relative to the endowment
factor and limit unintended
consequences. Since this rule is only
intended to implement existing
statutory requirements, we assess the
impacts of this final rule relative to a
pre-statutory baseline. In the absence of
passage of the CRRSAA, none of the
affected entities would have received
additional funding under the HEERF
program. Passage of CRRSAA resulted
in additional funds being made
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
21194
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
available to these entities. Specific to
this final rule, approximately $72.8
million in additional funds will be
made available to affected entities
through the endowment factor
implicated by this final rule. As noted
above, we do not anticipate this rule
resulting in any increased regulatory
burden for affected entities and, even if
the additional funding provided under
the endowment factor did result in such
increased costs, those costs would be far
outweighed by the additional funding
received. We do not anticipate this rule
to result in any transfers between
regulated entities given that, as
described above, the Department would
not be able to implement the statutory
requirements in a manner consistent
with the statutory text for certain
eligible entities without this final rule.
As a result, in the absence of this rule,
no entity would have received funds
under the endowment factor.
Regulatory Alternatives Considered
The Department considered a wide
range of options to address the issues
posed by the statutory requirements.
Initially, we considered whether it was
possible to resolve the issue without
regulating. As described elsewhere, we
determined that it would not be possible
to allocate funds for certain eligible
entities under the endowment factor in
a manner consistent with the statutory
requirements because doing so would
require the agency to divide by zero.
Alternatively, the Department could
have pursued a rule where it sought to
divide the entire amount of funds
equally among the nine entities with
zero-dollar endowments. Such an
approach would have focused resources
on entities with smaller endowments
but would have created sizable
disparities among entities. For example,
an entity without an endowment would
have received approximately $8.1
million, while the entity with the
smallest non-zero endowment (with an
endowment of only $6,400) would have
received no funding.
The Department also could have
pursued a rule that imputed a $1
endowment for all of the entities
without endowments, the minimum
required adjustment to allow for
formula allocations in accordance with
the statutory requirements. Using this
approach, approximately 55 institutions
would receive funds under the
endowment factor. Of those, 45 would
receive allocations of less than $100.
While this approach would be more
equitable than the prior alternatives, we
still do not believe such an approach
would meet the spirit of the statutory
requirement.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
Under this final rule, all 97 eligible
entities would receive funding, with the
smallest allocation being approximately
$7,300. We believe that this final rule,
which ensures that all entities receive at
least some funding under the
endowment factor while also heavily
preferencing those entities with small or
no endowments, best meets the
statutory intent.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
This analysis, required by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, presents an
estimate of the effect of the final
regulations on small entities. The U.S.
Small Business Administration (SBA)
Size Standards define proprietary IHEs
as small businesses if they are
independently owned and operated, are
not dominant in their field of operation,
and have total annual revenue below
$7,000,000. Nonprofit institutions are
defined as small entities if they are
independently owned and operated and
not dominant in their field of operation.
Public institutions and local educational
agencies are defined as small
organizations if they are operated by a
government overseeing a population
below 50,000.
For purposes of this analysis, the
Department proposes to define a small
institution as a two-year IHE with an
enrollment of less than 500 FTE or a
four-year IHE with an enrollment of less
than 1,000 FTE. Under this proposed
definition, we would identify 27 of the
97 affected entities as small. As noted
above, we estimate that this final rule
will result in benefits for all affected
entities with no regulatory burden.
Small institutions would, on average,
see an increase of approximately
$952,400 and non-small institutions
receiving an increase would see an
increase of approximately $407,900.
As such, the Department certifies that
this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
There are no information collection
requirements associated with this
regulatory action.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This document provides early
notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Assessment of Educational Impact
Based on our own review, we have
determined that these final regulations
do not require transmission of
information that any other agency or
authority of the United States gathers or
makes available.
Federalism
Executive Order 13132 requires us to
ensure meaningful and timely input by
State and local elected officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have federalism implications.
‘‘Federalism implications’’ means
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the
National Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. This final
regulation may have federalism
implications.
Accessible Format: On request to the
program contact person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
individuals with disabilities can obtain
this document and a copy of the
application package 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, and
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 for
free on 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.
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 34 CFR Part 677
Colleges and universities, Grant
programs-education, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Miguel Cardona,
Secretary of Education.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Secretary adds part 677 to
title 34 of the Code of Federal
Regulations to read as follows:
■
PART 677—HIGHER EDUCATION
EMERGENCY RELIEF FUND
PROGRAMS
Subpart A—Provisions Related to
Historically Black Colleges and Universities
Sec.
677.1 Calculations.
677.2 [Reserved]
Subpart B—Reserved
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e–3; section
314(a)(2), Pub. L. 116–260, Division M, 134
Stat. 1182.
Subpart A—Provisions Related to
Historically Black Colleges and
Universities
§ 677.1
Calculations.
For the purpose of calculating
allocations under section
314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the Coronavirus
Response and Relief Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2021 (division M of
Pub. L. 116–260, December 27, 2020), an
institution that has a total endowment
of less than $1,000,000, including an
institution that does not have an
endowment, will be treated by the
Secretary as having a total endowment
of $1,000,000.
§ 677.2
[Reserved]
Subpart B—Reserved
[FR Doc. 2021–08379 Filed 4–21–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED–2021–OESE–0061]
RIN 1810–AB64
American Rescue Plan Act Elementary
and Secondary School Emergency
Relief Fund
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Interim final requirements.
AGENCY:
The Department of Education
(‘‘Department’’) establishes interim final
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
requirements for the American Rescue
Plan Elementary and Secondary School
Emergency Relief (‘‘ARP ESSER’’) Fund,
under section 2001 of the American
Rescue Plan (‘‘ARP’’) Act of 2021. These
requirements are intended to promote
accountability, transparency, and the
effective use of funds by: Ensuring that
each State educational agency (‘‘SEA’’)
meaningfully engages in stakeholder
consultation and takes public input into
account in the development of its ARP
ESSER plan; ensuring that each local
educational agency (‘‘LEA’’) develops a
plan for the use of its ARP ESSER funds
and engages in meaningful consultation
and seeks public input as it develops
the LEA ARP ESSER plan; and
clarifying how an LEA must meet the
statutory requirement to develop a plan
for the safe return to in-person
instruction and continuity of services.
DATES: Effective date: These interim
final requirements are effective April 22,
2021.
Comment due date: We must receive
your comments on or before May 24,
2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or by 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.
If you are submitting comments
electronically, we strongly encourage
you to submit any comments or
attachments in Microsoft Word format.
If you must submit a comment in Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF), we
strongly encourage you to convert the
PDF to print-to-PDF format or to use
some other commonly used searchable
text format. Please do not submit the
PDF in a scanned format. Using a printto-PDF format allows the Department to
electronically search and copy certain
portions of your submissions.
• 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 ‘‘FAQ.’’
• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery,
or Hand Delivery: The Department
strongly encourages commenters to
submit their comments electronically.
However, if you mail or deliver your
comments about the interim final
requirements, address them to: Britt
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21195
Jung, U.S. Department of Education, 400
Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3W113,
Washington, DC 20202.
Privacy Note: The Department’s policy is
to make comments received from members of
the public available for public viewing on the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters
should include in their comments only
information that they wish to make publicly
available.
Britt
Jung, U.S. Department of Education, 400
Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3W113,
Washington, DC 20202. Telephone:
(202) 453–5563. Email: ESSERF@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: Although the Department
has decided to issue these interim final
requirements without first publishing
proposed requirements for public
comment, we are interested in whether
you think we should make any changes
in these requirements. We invite your
comments. We will consider these
comments in determining whether to
revise the requirements.
To ensure that your comments may be
most effectively considered, we urge
you to clearly identify the specific
section or sections of the interim final
requirements that each comment
addresses and to arrange your comments
in the same order as the interim final
requirements.
We invite you to assist us in
complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866
and 13563 and their overall requirement
of reducing regulatory burden that
might result from these interim final
requirements. Please let us know of any
further ways by which we could reduce
potential costs or increase potential
benefits while preserving the effective
and efficient administration of the
Department’s programs and activities.
During and after the comment period,
you may inspect all public comments
about these interim final requirements
by accessing www.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, Washington, DC
20202, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday
of each week except Federal holidays.
To schedule a time to inspect
comments, please contact the person
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 76 (Thursday, April 22, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21190-21195]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08379]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Part 677
RIN 1840-AD63
Calculation of the Endowment Factor for Allocations to
Historically Black Colleges and Universities Under Section 314(a)(2)(A)
of the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act,
2021
AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) issues this final
rule so that it may determine final allocations to Historically Black
Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) awarded under section 314(a)(2) of
the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act,
2021 (CRRSAA).
DATES: These regulations are effective April 22, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Epps, Office of Postsecondary
Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave. SW, Room
2B133, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 453-6337. Email:
[email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
[[Page 21191]]
Service (FRS), toll-free, at (800) 877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The CRRSAA was enacted on December 27, 2020, to help Americans cope
with the ongoing economic and health crises created by the novel
coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. Section 314 of the CRRSAA
authorizes supplemental awards to institutions of higher education
(IHEs) through the Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF)
initially established by section 18004 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief,
and Economic Security (CARES) Act (March 27, 2020). Section 314 of the
CRRSAA also authorizes, in paragraph (a)(2)(A), additional awards to
HBCUs eligible to receive assistance under two programs authorized by
the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA): The Strengthening
HBCUs program authorized by part B of title III of the HEA, and the
HBCU Masters program authorized by subpart 4 of part A of title VII of
the HEA. Section 314 further specifies, in paragraph (a)(2), the
amounts available for these additional awards and, in paragraph
(a)(2)(A), the three-part formula for determining the allocations to
each eligible HBCU.
This formula calls for the allocation of--
(1) 70 percent of funds according to a ratio equivalent to the
number of Pell Grant recipients in attendance at the institution at the
end of the school year preceding the beginning of the most recent
fiscal year and the total number of Pell Grant recipients at all such
institutions;
(2) 20 percent of funds according to a ratio equivalent to the
total number of students enrolled at the institution at the end of the
school year preceding the beginning of that fiscal year and the number
of students enrolled at all such institutions; and
(3) 10 percent of funds according to a ratio equivalent to the
total endowment size at all eligible institutions at the end of the
school year preceding the beginning of that fiscal year and the total
endowment size at the institution.
The first two elements for determining allocations to HBCUs under
section 314(a)(2)(A) of the CRRSAA reflect a familiar and
straightforward methodology: Institutions receive a share of funds
commensurate with their respective shares of Pell Grant recipients and
total overall enrollment at all eligible institutions. However, the
third element, also known as the endowment factor, calls for allocating
10 percent of funds based on an inverse proportion of an institution's
share of the total endowment funding at all eligible institutions. In
other words, institutions with the smallest endowments receive the
largest share of funds. This inverse proportion formula reflects the
intent of Congress to direct additional funding to institutions unable
to tap endowment resources to meet needs arising from the COVID-19
pandemic. Such institutions often have smaller enrollments or serve
highly disadvantaged populations; consequently, they have not been able
to build up significant endowment funds over time that might have been
used to respond to the COVID-19-related disruptions to teaching and
learning on campus.
In fact, some institutions reported an endowment value of zero,
which contributed to the circumstances requiring this final rule.
Specifically, endowment data collected by the Department for the
purpose of determining the allocation of funds through the endowment
factor showed that, of 97 eligible institutions, nine reported an
endowment value of zero. While it seems clear that Congress intended
for such institutions to receive the largest share of endowment factor
funding because of their complete lack of endowment resources to call
upon in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is not possible to
generate the endowment ratios described in section 314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of
the CRRSAA for these schools due to the mathematic principle that
division by zero yields an undefined result and thus has no meaning.
Therefore, it would be impossible to implement this formula in a manner
consistent with the statutory text for certain eligible entities.
Excluding these schools entirely from the endowment factor
calculation would seem contrary to the plain language of the statute,
as the Act does not expressly exclude these entities and is meant to
include all eligible institutions under part B of title III and subpart
4 of part A of title VII of the HEA. Moreover, even if the nine HBCUs
with zero endowments could be excluded from the formula, there is a
large enough gap between the institution with the lowest non-zero
endowment and other institutions with non-zero endowments that the
institution with the lowest non-zero endowment would garner nearly all
of the program funding ($72.8 million) allocable through the endowment
factor. The Department does not believe such an inequitable outcome
would be consistent with the design of the endowment factor formula;
rather, it indicates a technical oversight in developing the endowment
factor.
In response to the inability to implement this formula in a manner
consistent with the statutory text for certain eligible entities, the
Department consulted with Congress to determine options for calculating
awards to HBCUs under section 314(a)(2) of the CRRSAA. These
discussions were focused on two goals: (1) Ensuring that all eligible
institutions with relatively low endowment values benefited from the
endowment factor, and (2) ensuring that the endowment factor operated
as intended, delivering significantly greater amounts of funding to
those institutions with the smallest endowments rather than to those
institutions with the largest endowments. This consultation took on
additional urgency because of the possibility that additional HEERF
appropriations for HBCUs would be provided on the basis of the formula
in section 314(a)(2)(A) of the CRRSAA as part of the American Rescue
Plan Act of 2021 (ARP).
Ultimately, Congress provided such additional appropriations in the
ARP and directed IHEs to make allocations in accordance with the same
terms and conditions as those provided in section 314 of the CRRSAA,
with several exceptions. Of relevance here, Congress established a
``floor'' on the endowment value used when allocating the ARP-provided
HEERF funds based on the endowment factor. Section 2003(3) of the ARP
specifies that an institution ``that has a total endowment size of less
than $1,000,000 (including an institution that does not have an
endowment) shall be treated by the Secretary as having a total
endowment size of $1,000,000'' for the purposes of section
314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the CRRSAA, which is used to determine allocations
under the ARP. However, this provision does not apply to the HEERF
funds appropriated in the CRRSAA. Consequently, the Department
determined that the best course of action would be to issue regulations
on the endowment factor under section 314(a)(2). In the interim, on
February 26, 2021, the Department awarded 90 percent of the funds
provided to HBCUs under section 314(a)(2) of the CRRSAA--the funds
allocated on the basis of factors 1 and 2 of the formula in section
314(a)(2)(A).
In considering alternatives for refining the methodology for
implementing the endowment factor, the Department relied on analyses of
options developed both prior to and during consultation with Congress
regarding the challenges
[[Page 21192]]
presented by the endowment factor under the CRRSAA.
We considered exclusion of the nine entities that reported an
endowment position of zero. As stated above, we determined this was
inconsistent with the plain language of the statute. Further, it would
exclude the institutions with the greatest need--i.e., those
institutions reporting endowment amounts of zero--while allocating
virtually all funds apportioned to the endowment factor to just two of
the 88 eligible institutions with non-zero endowments. Such an outcome
would be contrary to the purpose of any funding formula based on
proportionality, which is to provide benefits to all eligible entities
in proportion to one or more characteristics of those entities, and not
to merely direct all or nearly all applicable funding to a few such
entities.
Given that we cannot implement the formula in a manner consistent
with the statutory text for certain eligible entities, we considered a
variety of approaches. A rule that imputed a small dollar amount to the
nine eligible institutions reporting zero endowment funding, such as
$1, would result in the allocation of nearly all funding to those
institutions, effectively preventing the accrual of any benefits from
the endowment factor to any other eligible institutions (approximately
$8.1 million would be awarded to each of the nine institutions with
zero endowments and a balance of less than $1,500 would be distributed
among the remaining eligible institutions). Again, such an outcome
would not, in the Department's view, be consistent with the basic
equity principles that generally underlie the funding formulas enacted
by Congress for the many formula grant programs administered by the
Department.
The Department also explored an option that considered the
relationship between the amount institutions receive through the
endowment factor and the sum of that value in combination with the
institution's reported (or imputed, in the case of the institutions
reporting $0 endowments) endowment. The underlying principle of this
approach was that while the endowment factor was to direct additional
funding to institutions with the smallest endowments, such institutions
should not benefit disproportionately when compared to other
institutions with small endowments. For example, it would be both
inequitable and inconsistent with the design of the endowment factor if
an institution with a reported endowment of $100,000 received
$3,000,000 from the endowment factor--effectively increasing its
endowment-based resources to $3,100,000--while another institution with
a reported endowment of $1,000,000 received $500,000 from the endowment
factor, effectively ending up with just half ($1,500,000) of the
endowment-based resources as the first institution. In other words, no
institution's allocation from the endowment factor should exceed the
resources available to any other institution based on the sum of its
allocation from the endowment factor and its reported endowment. The
Department's preliminary modeling of an option based on this principle
produced an appropriately graduated distribution of endowment factor
allocations to all 97 institutions, while directing 72 percent of funds
to the bottom quartile of institutions ranked by endowment size, a
result that the Department deemed both equitable and consistent with
the core purpose of the endowment factor.
Importantly, for the purposes of this final rule, the $1,000,000
floor endowment amount set by Congress for use in calculating endowment
factor allocations under the ARP yields an equitable distribution of
funds nearly identical to that of the Department's ``imputed endowment
size'' model. Specifically, applying the ARP's $1,000,000 endowment
floor to the endowment factor in the CRRSAA would allocate $54.3
million, or 75 percent of funds, to the bottom quartile of institutions
ranked by endowment size.
Consequently, the Department has concluded that the equitable
impact of the $1,000,000 floor endowment threshold adopted by Congress
for the purpose of calculating endowment factor allocations under the
ARP, combined with its simplicity and the benefits of a uniform
approach to determining endowment factor allocations across the ARP and
the CRRSAA, make that same $1,000,000 endowment floor the most
appropriate manner to implement the endowment factor formula in section
314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the CRRSAA, which cannot otherwise be implemented
in a manner consistent with the statutory text for certain eligible
entities.
Significant Regulations
Statute: Section 314 of the CRRSAA (division M of Public Law 116-
260, December 27, 2020) provides for funding for eligible HBCUs.
Specifically, section 314(a)(2)(A) specifies a three-part formula for
determining the allocations to each eligible HBCU, including an
endowment factor that allocates 10 percent of the available funding
according to a ratio equivalent to the total endowment size at all
eligible institutions at the end of the school year preceding the
beginning of that fiscal year and the total endowment size at the
institution.
Current Regulation: None.
New Regulation: In new Sec. 677.1, we provide that, for the
purpose of calculating allocations under section 314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of
the CRRSAA, an institution that has a total endowment of less than
$1,000,000, including an institution that does not have an endowment,
will be treated by the Secretary as having an endowment of $1,000,000.
Reasons: The Department is making this regulatory change to remedy
a technical defect in the statute; allocate funds consistent with its
best interpretation of the statutory purpose of the endowment factor;
make the allocation methodology related to endowment size under the
CRRSAA consistent with the refined methodology under the ARP; and
ensure that the endowment factor operates to equitably deliver funding
to eligible institutions based on the relative size of their
endowments. See the Background section for a more detailed discussion
of our reasons for this regulatory change.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking and Delayed Effective Date Under the
Administrative Procedure Act
Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553), the
Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to
comment on proposed rules. However, the APA provides that an agency is
not required to conduct notice and comment rulemaking when the agency,
for good cause, finds that notice and public comment thereon are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest (5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B)).
Congress enacted the CRRSAA to help Americans cope with the urgent
economic and health crises created by the COVID-19 outbreak and created
the HEERF to provide emergency financial aid grants to students and
institutions. Section 314(b)(2)(B) of the CRRSAA requires the
Secretary, to the extent practicable, to make awards to HBCUs under
section 314(a)(2) by February 25, 2021. In the absence of this final
rule, the Department would be unable to timely award the final 10
percent of funds appropriated by Congress to HBCUs under section
314(a)(2) of the CRRSAA in a manner that equitably benefits those HBCUs
with limited endowments serving large numbers or percentages of
students from low-
[[Page 21193]]
income families. In light of the urgent economic challenges facing IHEs
as a result of the current national emergency and the importance of
awarding all available emergency funds appropriated by Congress as
quickly as possible, particularly to those institutions without access
to much-needed resources that can help address the disruption to
teaching and learning caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, it would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest to conduct notice-
and-comment rulemaking. Accordingly, there is good cause to waive the
notice and comment requirements of the APA.
Moreover, the APA generally requires that regulations be published
at least 30 days before their effective date, unless the agency has
good cause to implement its regulations sooner (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)). As
described above, good cause exists for this rule to be effective upon
publication in light of the current national emergency and the
importance of awarding HEERF allocations to eligible institutions in a
timely manner consistent with statutory intent.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) must determine 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.
This final regulatory action is a significant regulatory action
subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs designated this rule as
not a ``major rule'', as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
We have also reviewed these regulations under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing this final rule only on a reasoned determination
that its benefits would justify its costs. In choosing among
alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that
would maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the
Department believes that these regulations are consistent with the
principles in Executive Order 13563.
We have also determined that this regulatory action would not
unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
Need for Regulatory Action
The Department is issuing this final rule to clarify the
methodology for calculating allocations to HBCUs in accordance with the
endowment factor described in section 314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the CRRSAA.
The endowment factor is intended to provide additional funding to
institutions with limited endowment resources available to address
institutional and student needs arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.
This final rule addresses a defect in the statutory allocation formula
and permits the allocation of all available funds to eligible
institutions as quickly as possible.
As detailed in the preamble of this final rule, in light of the
current national emergency and the importance of delivering HEERF
awards to institutions as soon as possible, notice-and-comment
rulemaking would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.
Absent immediate implementation of this final rule, the Department
would be unable to timely award the remaining HBCU funding in a manner
consistent with the intent to provide funding to eligible HBCUs based
on relative endowment size, with a potentially serious negative impact
on both institutions and the students they serve.
Costs, Benefits, and Transfers
As noted elsewhere in this final rule, this regulatory change
affects only the allocation of funding under the HEERF program. It does
not impose or relieve any regulatory or compliance burden on regulated
entities. In general, we do not anticipate this final rule to impose
any net costs on affected entities. However, to the extent that the
receipt of funding under this program affects the marginal cost of
administering funds, there may be some effects on participating
institutions, but given the overall amount of funding administered
under this program and the relatively small amount implicated by this
rule, we expect those effects to be de minimis.
As noted above, this final rule will allow the Department to
operationalize the statutory requirements of the CRRSAA relative to the
endowment factor and limit unintended consequences. Since this rule is
only intended to implement existing statutory requirements, we assess
the impacts of this final rule relative to a pre-statutory baseline. In
the absence of passage of the CRRSAA, none of the affected entities
would have received additional funding under the HEERF program. Passage
of CRRSAA resulted in additional funds being made
[[Page 21194]]
available to these entities. Specific to this final rule, approximately
$72.8 million in additional funds will be made available to affected
entities through the endowment factor implicated by this final rule. As
noted above, we do not anticipate this rule resulting in any increased
regulatory burden for affected entities and, even if the additional
funding provided under the endowment factor did result in such
increased costs, those costs would be far outweighed by the additional
funding received. We do not anticipate this rule to result in any
transfers between regulated entities given that, as described above,
the Department would not be able to implement the statutory
requirements in a manner consistent with the statutory text for certain
eligible entities without this final rule. As a result, in the absence
of this rule, no entity would have received funds under the endowment
factor.
Regulatory Alternatives Considered
The Department considered a wide range of options to address the
issues posed by the statutory requirements. Initially, we considered
whether it was possible to resolve the issue without regulating. As
described elsewhere, we determined that it would not be possible to
allocate funds for certain eligible entities under the endowment factor
in a manner consistent with the statutory requirements because doing so
would require the agency to divide by zero.
Alternatively, the Department could have pursued a rule where it
sought to divide the entire amount of funds equally among the nine
entities with zero-dollar endowments. Such an approach would have
focused resources on entities with smaller endowments but would have
created sizable disparities among entities. For example, an entity
without an endowment would have received approximately $8.1 million,
while the entity with the smallest non-zero endowment (with an
endowment of only $6,400) would have received no funding.
The Department also could have pursued a rule that imputed a $1
endowment for all of the entities without endowments, the minimum
required adjustment to allow for formula allocations in accordance with
the statutory requirements. Using this approach, approximately 55
institutions would receive funds under the endowment factor. Of those,
45 would receive allocations of less than $100. While this approach
would be more equitable than the prior alternatives, we still do not
believe such an approach would meet the spirit of the statutory
requirement.
Under this final rule, all 97 eligible entities would receive
funding, with the smallest allocation being approximately $7,300. We
believe that this final rule, which ensures that all entities receive
at least some funding under the endowment factor while also heavily
preferencing those entities with small or no endowments, best meets the
statutory intent.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
This analysis, required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, presents
an estimate of the effect of the final regulations on small entities.
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) Size Standards define
proprietary IHEs as small businesses if they are independently owned
and operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and have
total annual revenue below $7,000,000. Nonprofit institutions are
defined as small entities if they are independently owned and operated
and not dominant in their field of operation. Public institutions and
local educational agencies are defined as small organizations if they
are operated by a government overseeing a population below 50,000.
For purposes of this analysis, the Department proposes to define a
small institution as a two-year IHE with an enrollment of less than 500
FTE or a four-year IHE with an enrollment of less than 1,000 FTE. Under
this proposed definition, we would identify 27 of the 97 affected
entities as small. As noted above, we estimate that this final rule
will result in benefits for all affected entities with no regulatory
burden. Small institutions would, on average, see an increase of
approximately $952,400 and non-small institutions receiving an increase
would see an increase of approximately $407,900.
As such, the Department certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
There are no information collection requirements associated with
this regulatory action.
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.
Assessment of Educational Impact
Based on our own review, we have determined that these final
regulations do not require transmission of information that any other
agency or authority of the United States gathers or makes available.
Federalism
Executive Order 13132 requires us to ensure meaningful and timely
input by State and local elected officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism implications. ``Federalism
implications'' means substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. This final regulation may have federalism implications.
Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
can obtain this document and a copy of the application package 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, and 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 for
free on 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.
[[Page 21195]]
List of Subjects in 34 CFR Part 677
Colleges and universities, Grant programs-education, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Miguel Cardona,
Secretary of Education.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Secretary adds part 677
to title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as follows:
PART 677--HIGHER EDUCATION EMERGENCY RELIEF FUND PROGRAMS
Subpart A--Provisions Related to Historically Black Colleges and
Universities
Sec.
677.1 Calculations.
677.2 [Reserved]
Subpart B--Reserved
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3; section 314(a)(2), Pub. L. 116-
260, Division M, 134 Stat. 1182.
Subpart A--Provisions Related to Historically Black Colleges and
Universities
Sec. 677.1 Calculations.
For the purpose of calculating allocations under section
314(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2021 (division M of Pub. L. 116-260, December 27,
2020), an institution that has a total endowment of less than
$1,000,000, including an institution that does not have an endowment,
will be treated by the Secretary as having a total endowment of
$1,000,000.
Sec. 677.2 [Reserved]
Subpart B--Reserved
[FR Doc. 2021-08379 Filed 4-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P