Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation Research Abroad Fellowship Program and Faculty Research Abroad Fellowship Program, 85502-85508 [2023-26991]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
85502
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
§ 165.T14–0743 Safety Zone; Pacific
Ocean, Lahaina Boat Basin, Maui, HI—
Emergency Operations and Port Recovery.
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: All waters extending 200
yards from shore from the northernmost
boundary, 60 yards south of the
intersection of Front Street and Baker
Street, Maui, to the southernmost
boundary, 20 yards south of the
intersection of Front Street and Shaw
Street, Maui.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol
Commander, including a Coast Guard
coxswain, petty officer, or other officer
operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer
designated by or assisting the Captain of
the Port Sector Honolulu (COTP) in the
enforcement of the safety zone.
(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general
safety zone regulations in subpart C of
this part, you may not enter the safety
zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section unless authorized by the COTP
or the COTP’s designated representative.
(2) To seek permission to enter,
contact the COTP or the COTP’s
representative by VHF/FM Chanel 16.
Those in the safety zone must comply
with all lawful orders or directions
given to them by the COTP or the
COTP’s designated representative.
(d) Enforcement period. This rule will
be enforced December 1, 2023, through
December 15, 2023, unless an earlier
end is announced by broadcast notice to
mariners.
Dated: December 1, 2023.
A.L. Kirksey,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Sector Honolulu.
[FR Doc. 2023–26808 Filed 12–7–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Parts 662 and 663
RIN 1840–AD90
Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation
Research Abroad Fellowship Program
and Faculty Research Abroad
Fellowship Program
Office of Postsecondary
Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final regulations.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Education (Department or we) issues
final regulations governing the
Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation
Research Abroad (DDRA) Fellowship
Program and the Faculty Research
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:05 Dec 07, 2023
Jkt 262001
Abroad (FRA) Fellowship Program. This
rule revises language proficiency
qualifications for DDRA and FRA
applicants and clarifies the Secretary’s
discretionary use of eligibility criteria.
DATES: These regulations are effective
January 8, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Pamela J. Maimer, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
5th Floor, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 453–6891. Email:
pamela.maimer@ed.gov.
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or
have a speech disability and wish to
access telecommunications relay
services, please dial 7–1–1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The DDRA Fellowship Program
provides opportunities for doctoral
students to engage in dissertation
research abroad in modern foreign
languages and area studies. The program
is designed to contribute to the
development and improvement of the
study of modern foreign languages and
area studies in the United States and to
increase scholars’ knowledge of the
culture of the people in the countries or
regions of research. The program
provides fellowships to doctoral
candidates who are planning a teaching
career in the United States upon
completion of their programs and who
possess sufficient foreign language skills
in the country or countries of research
to carry out the dissertation research
project.
The FRA Fellowship Program
provides opportunities for faculty
members teaching modern foreign
languages or area studies at U.S.
institutions of higher education (IHEs)
to engage in research abroad in those
languages or areas studied. The program
is designed to contribute to the faculty
members’ foreign language skills and to
increase knowledge of the culture of the
people in the countries or regions of
research.
On March 21, 2023, the Secretary
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for these parts in
the Federal Register.1 These final
regulations contain changes from the
NPRM, which we explain in the
Analysis of Comments and Changes
section of this document.
Public Comment: In response to our
invitation in the NPRM, the Department
received five comments on the proposed
regulations. We address those comments
in the Analysis of Comments and
Changes section below.
1 88
PO 00000
FR 16924.
Frm 00036
Analysis of Comments and Changes
We group issues according to subject,
with appropriate sections of the
regulations referenced in parentheses,
where applicable. We discuss other
substantive issues under the sections of
the regulations to which they pertain.
Generally, we do not address minor,
non-substantive changes (such as
renumbering paragraphs, adding a word,
or typographical errors). Additionally,
we do not address recommended
changes that the statute does not
authorize the Secretary to make or
comments pertaining to operational
processes. We generally do not address
comments pertaining to issues that were
not within the scope of the NPRM.
An analysis of the public comments
received and the changes to the
regulations since publication of the
NPRM follows.
General Support
Comments: Two commenters
supported the proposed regulations.
Discussion: We thank the commenters
for their support. We believe these
changes maintain the statutory goals
and the integrity of the programs.
Changes: None.
General Opposition
Comments: One commenter objected
to the existence of both the DDRA and
the FRA programs.
Discussion: These programs are
authorized by statute.2
Changes: None.
Secretarial Discretion (§§ 662.21(c) and
663.21(c))
Comments: One commenter asked the
Department to explain whether the
proposed rule is intended to merely
clarify the Secretary’s existing
discretion to vary selection criteria
point values assigned to DDRA or FRA,
which was granted in a 2005
rulemaking, or whether the proposed
rule would grant new discretion to the
Secretary. If the latter, the commenter
believed that the Department should
explain any additional discretion and
give the public an opportunity to
comment on the proposed expansion.
The commenter further opined that,
as the Fulbright-Hays Act and the
Department’s eligibility regulations
require the Secretary to meaningfully
consider foreign language skills, the
Department should finalize §§ 662.21(c)
and 663.21(c) without the proposed
‘‘one or more’’ phrase in the
introductory text or otherwise clarify
that the Secretary may not ignore
foreign language skills when awarding
2 22
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
U.S.C. 2452(b)(6).
08DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
DDRA and FRA Fellowships. The
commenter objected to the proposed
rule to the extent that it would grant
discretion to ignore foreign language
skills in the DDRA and FRA
competitions.
Lastly, this commenter stated that, if
finalized as proposed, the revisions to
§§ 662.21(c)(3), 662.21(c)(4),
663.21(c)(3), and 663.21(c)(4) would
address the concerns identified in a
recent lawsuit filed on behalf of DDRA
applicants 3 who challenged the weight
given to their respective native
languages in the selection process.
Discussion: The Department
appreciates this commenter’s concerns
and wishes to clarify that the additional
discretion proposed under §§ 662.21(c)
and 663.21(c) to allow the Secretary to
consider ‘‘one or more’’ of the listed
applicant qualification criteria, while
expanding the Secretary’s discretion
under these particular programs, is an
appropriate exercise of the Secretary’s
general authority under 34 CFR 75.201
to identify and notify applicants of grant
competition selection criteria (an
authority which is routinely used, for
example, across Departmental programs
utilizing the general selection criteria
under 34 CFR 75.210) and is consistent
with the Fulbright-Hays Act.4 The
Department would only use this
flexibility consistent with the programs’
statutory requirement to ‘‘promot[e]
modern foreign language training and
area studies in United States
schools[.]’’ 5 The Department believes
that it is able to discharge this
requirement and the purpose of these
grants for ‘‘improving [an applicant’s]
skill in languages’’ within the
framework of several of the criteria
looking at the Qualification of an
Applicant, and that this duty does not
rest solely on any single criteria under
that section. The flexibility to select
‘‘one or more’’ of the applicant
qualification criteria under §§ 662.21(c)
and 663.21(c) will enhance the
Department’s ability to structure its
grant competitions to select the most
qualified applicants for funding,
because it will allow the Department to
focus from year-to-year on those
selection criteria that have yielded
applications from the most qualified
candidates. It also will allow the
Department to review the effect of
omitting a particular selection criterion
3 See Lujan v. U.S. Dep’t of Educ., No. 3:22–CV–
00159–DCG, F. Supp. 3d__, 2023 WL 2638280
(W.D. Tex. Mar. 24, 2023).
4 See 34 CFR 75.201 (‘‘[i]n the application
package or a notice published in the Federal
Register, the Secretary informs applicants of . . .
[t]he selection criteria chosen[.]’’).
5 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:05 Dec 07, 2023
Jkt 262001
in a given year on the quality of
applicants, without having to go
through additional rulemaking to obtain
this information.
Changes: None.
Severability (§§ 662.8 and 663.8)
Comments: None.
Discussion: Current regulations in 34
CFR 662 and 663 do not address
severability. The Department seeks to
clarify its intent that, with regard to
severability, each of the regulations in
34 CFR parts 662 and 663 and its
subparts serves one or more important,
related, but distinct, purposes. To best
serve these purposes, we included this
administrative provision in the
regulations to make clear that the
regulations are designed to operate
independently of each other and to
convey the Department’s intent that the
potential invalidity of one provision or
any of its subparts should not affect the
remainder of the provisions.
Changes: We have added new
severability provisions in §§ 662.8 and
663.8.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
14094
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866,
the Secretary must determine whether
this regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’
and, therefore, subject to the
requirements of the E.O. and subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of E.O.
12866, as amended by E.O. 14094,
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 $200 million or more
(adjusted every three years by the
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) for changes in gross domestic
product); or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or state, local, territorial, or
Tribal governments or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impacts of entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise legal or policy issues for
which centralized review would
meaningfully further the President’s
priorities or the principles stated in the
Executive order, as specifically
authorized in a timely manner by the
Administrator of OIRA in each case.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
85503
This final regulatory action is not a
significant regulatory action subject to
review by OMB under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866 (as amended by
E.O. 14094).
We have also reviewed these
regulations under E.O. 13563, which
supplements and explicitly reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions
governing regulatory review established
in E.O. 12866. To the extent permitted
by law, E.O. 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
providing information that enables the
public to make choices.
E.O. 13563 also requires an agency ‘‘to
use the best available techniques to
quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as
possible.’’ OMB’s OIRA has emphasized
that these techniques may include
‘‘identifying changing future
compliance costs that might result from
technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.’’
The Department has assessed the
potential costs and benefits, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this
regulatory action, and we are issuing
these final requirements only on a
reasoned determination that their
benefits justify their costs. In choosing
among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those
approaches that would maximize net
benefits. Based on the analysis that
follows and the reasons stated
elsewhere in this document, the
Department believes that the final
requirements are consistent with the
principles in E.O. 13563.
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
85504
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
We also have determined that this
regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with state, local, territorial, or
Tribal governments in the exercise of
their governmental functions.
In this regulatory impact analysis, we
discuss the need for regulatory action,
the potential costs and benefits, and net
budget impacts.
Elsewhere, under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), we
identify and explain burdens
specifically associated with information
collection requirements.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Need for Regulatory Action
The Department amends the DDRA
and FRA program regulations to
promote fairness in the application
review process for native speakers of
languages other than English. These
revisions are also consistent with the
statutory framework for the DDRA and
FRA programs and are necessary to
support the statutory goal of ‘‘promoting
modern foreign language training and
area studies in United States
schools[.]’’ 6 Additionally, revising the
introductory language of §§ 662.21(c)
and 663.21(c) to allow consideration of
‘‘one or more’’ of the listed criteria will
enable the Department to administer
these competitive grant programs in a
manner that prioritizes the most
qualified applicants for funding.
Finally, the addition of severability
clauses to the regulations for these
programs will enable the Department to
administer these programs more
effectively if a component of the
regulations is invalidated by a court.
Discussion of Costs, Benefits, and
Transfers
The Department believes this
regulatory action will not impose
significant new cost-bearing
requirements on IHEs or other entities.
We also believe that the benefits of
implementing this regulatory action
outweigh any associated costs.
We anticipate a minimal increase of
10–15 DDRA and FRA program
applications as a result of eliminating
the native language proficiency
exclusion and foresee minimal impact
on the Department’s time and cost for
reviewing these additional applications.
Over the last 5 years, the amount of
annual funding for the DDRA program
has ranged from approximately $3.4 to
$5.5 million, with an average of 200
grant applications received per year,
and an average of 50 percent of
applications ultimately receiving grant
awards. With the changes to the
regulation, the Department expects an
6 22
U.S.C. 2452(b)(6).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:05 Dec 07, 2023
Jkt 262001
increase of 10–15 applications per year,
based on the number of applicants that
have applied to study a geographic area
that shares their native language skills
in recent years.
An increase in the number of
applicants or awards granted could
result in additional costs to the
Department in securing readers to
review applications, but if additional
costs arise, they will be minimal. The
Department pays readers $1,200 to
review applications, and the number of
applications per reader ranges from 15
to a maximum of 22. An increase in 10–
15 applications could increase costs by
an additional $1,200 to secure an
additional reader. However, the number
of DDRA applications has declined over
the last several years from a high of
almost 250 to a low of just more than
150 in 2022. As a result, an increase in
immediate applications would not
result in any overall comparative
additional costs, as a nominal increase
in applications will restore DDRA to the
average amount of applications received
in prior years. We anticipate no
additional costs to grant recipients, as
we will continue to pay for grant
activities with program funds. We also
note that program participation is
voluntary.
In fiscal year (FY) 2022, the
Department conducted an FRA
competition and awarded 22 recipients
a total of approximately $1.3 million.
The FY 2022 competition was the first
FRA competition in more than 10 years.
The Fulbright-Hays appropriation
decreased from $15.6 million in FY
2010 to $7.5 million in FY 2011; the
nearly 50 percent decrease in available
funding hindered our ability to conduct
competitions and make awards under
all four Fulbright-Hays programs. The
result was a suspension of the FRA
program from 2011 to 2021.
Between 2011 and 2021, the funding
level for the Fulbright-Hays programs
averaged $7.4 million. In FY 2022, the
amount increased to $9.8 million, which
enabled us to re-activate the FRA
program. Although we will not conduct
the FRA competition in FY 2023, we do
anticipate conducting another FRA
competition in FY 2024, contingent
upon funding availability. Given that we
held only one FRA competition in the
last 10 years, we cannot discuss
potential trends in those program
applications or potential corresponding
costs.
The benefits of these final regulations
include better aligning DDRA and FRA
applicant qualifications with other
comparable grant programs to focus on
overall language proficiency and
increasing equitable access to research
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
abroad for those demonstrating language
proficiency in the language of the
countries in which their doctoral-level
or faculty research study will occur.
This will apply regardless of the
applicant’s native language.
Additionally, we expect that the
regulations will lead to an increase in
the number of applications overall,
which will make the program more
competitive and enable the Department
to fund even higher quality
applications. The increase in
applications specifically from
individuals with native languages other
than English will yield additional
applications from individuals speaking
a wider variety of native languages, as
well as more applications recommended
for funding from these individuals.
These regulations will also more fully
account for proficiency by adding a new
selection criterion that considers an
applicant’s academic record. Under this
criterion, we will consider any steps the
applicant has taken to improve
proficiency in the language of study and
ensure adequate preparation for the
proposed research project. We believe
this criterion will support the
programmatic goal of the DDRA and
FRA to promote training ‘‘in United
States schools, colleges, and
universities.’’ Allowing applicants to
show steps taken to improve their
language proficiency in an academic
setting will better demonstrate their
ability to study in that language abroad.
This change may also encourage
applicants to complete additional
training as a way to strengthen their
application.
Finally, providing Secretarial
discretion to determine the factors that
will be considered when reviewing the
qualifications of applicants would
increase flexibility to implement the
program within statutory requirements
while adapting to changing
Departmental priorities for international
and foreign language education. This
change will align DDRA and FRA with
other Departmental programs that
provide discretion to the Secretary to
select among the regulated selection
criteria when deciding which criteria to
emphasize in a competition year.
We do not anticipate any cost to the
Federal government as a result of this
particular change, beyond nominal costs
associated with updating the
application package. We do not expect
any impact on the number of
applications received as a result of this
change, nor do we anticipate any costs
to grant recipients. Accordingly, we do
not anticipate any burden cost with the
addition of this particular criterion.
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Net Budget Impacts
These proposed regulations are not
estimated to have a significant net
impact on the Federal budget. As noted
above, the Department estimates that
these final regulations will not result in
additional net costs.
Alternatives Considered
In addition to allowing native
speakers to receive points based on
§§ 662.21(c)(3) and 663.21(c)(3), we
considered allowing English as the
language for the country of research,
which is currently restricted. We did
not take that approach because we
believe maintaining the requirement
that applicants demonstrate proficiency
in a language ‘‘other than English’’ more
appropriately meets the statutory goal of
‘‘promoting modern foreign language
training and area studies in United
States schools[.]’’ 7
We also considered continuing to
solely provide points for language
proficiency without consideration of
additional steps taken to improve
proficiency. We did not take that
approach because we believe that
including a criterion that considers
steps taken to improve proficiency in a
domestic academic setting better meets
the statutory goal of promoting training
‘‘in United States schools, colleges, and
universities’’ 8 and will better
demonstrate applicants’ ability to study
in that language abroad. This change
may also encourage applicants to
complete additional training as a way to
strengthen their application.
Additionally, we believe that replacing
the exclusion for native language skills
other than English with a focus on both
an applicant’s current foreign language
skills and efforts to master the language
of study will be more effective in
increasing the capabilities and diversity
of applicants and participants, while
remaining consistent with the statutory
goals of these programs.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act 9 that these
regulations will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of ‘‘small entities.’’
The small entities that will be affected
by the proposed regulations are IHEs
that submit applications to the
Department under this program. The
final regulations will not have a
significant economic impact on the
small entities affected because they will
not impose excessive regulatory burdens
or require unnecessary Federal
85505
supervision. The final regulations will
impose minimal requirements to ensure
the proper expenditure of program
funds.
In the NPRM, we invited the public to
comment on our proposed certification
that these regulations would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. We
did not receive any comments on this
subject.
The Small Business Administration
(SBA) defines ‘‘small institution’’ using
data on revenue, market dominance, tax
filing status, governing body, and
population. Most entities to which the
Office of Postsecondary Education’s
regulations apply are postsecondary
institutions. However, we do not require
institutions to report such data to the
Department. As a result, for purposes of
this final rule, the Department defines
‘‘small entities’’ by reference to
enrollment to allow meaningful
comparison of regulatory impact across
all types of higher education
institutions.10 We consider two-year
postsecondary educational institutions
with enrollment of fewer than 500 fulltime equivalent (FTE) and 4-year
postsecondary educational institutions
with enrollment of fewer than 1,000
FTE to be small entities.
TABLE 1—SMALL INSTITUTIONS UNDER ENROLLMENT-BASED DEFINITION
Type
Small
Total
Percentage
of total
Proprietary ...................................................................................................................................
2-year ....................................................................................................................................
4-year ....................................................................................................................................
Private not-for-profit .....................................................................................................................
2-year ....................................................................................................................................
4-year ....................................................................................................................................
Public ...........................................................................................................................................
2-year ....................................................................................................................................
4-year ....................................................................................................................................
1,973
1,734
239
983
185
798
380
317
63
2,331
1,990
341
1,831
203
1,628
1,924
1,145
779
85
87
70
54
91
49
20
28
8
Total ...............................................................................................................................
3,336
6,086
55
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Source: Department analysis of 2020–21 IPEDS data.
The Department used Integrated
Postsecondary Education Data System
(IPEDS) data from fiscal year 2020
reported under the finance data
category. This reporting does not
include all participating institutions and
provides approximate data.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act also
requires us to estimate the effect of the
final regulations on small entities. We
7 22
U.S.C. 2452(b)(6).
8 Ibid.
95
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
some prior regulations, the Department
categorized small businesses based on tax status.
Those regulations defined ‘‘non-profit
10 In
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:05 Dec 07, 2023
Jkt 262001
identified 27 of the 97 affected entities
as small. As noted above, we estimated
that this final rule will result in benefits
for all affected entities without
regulatory burden. We estimated that
small institutions will, on average, see
an increase of approximately $952,400
in funding. Similarly, we projected that
non-small institutions will receive an
increase of approximately $407,900.
In terms of regulatory impact, these
regulations are designed to avoid
excessive burdens or unnecessary
Federal supervision. The minimal cost
that these regulations will impose are
those associated with grantees’
obligation to certify participant
eligibility and safeguard the proper
expenditure of program funds.
Consequently, the Department certifies
organizations’’ as ‘‘small organizations’’ if they were
independently owned and operated and not
dominant in their field of operation, or as ‘‘small
entities’’ if they were institutions controlled by
governmental entities with populations below
50,000. Those definitions resulted in the
categorization of all private nonprofit organizations
as small and no public institutions as small. Under
the previous definition, proprietary institutions
were considered small if they were independently
owned and operated and not dominant in their field
of operation with total annual revenue below
$7,000,000.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
85506
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
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
PRA.11 This helps to ensure that the
public understands the Department’s
collection instructions, respondents can
provide the requested data in the
desired format, reporting burden (time
and financial resources) is minimized,
collection instruments are clearly
understood, and the Department can
properly assess the impact of collection
requirements on respondents.
Sections 662.21(c)(3) and 663.21(c)(3)
of the regulations contain information
collection requirements. Under the PRA,
the Department submitted a copy of
these sections to OMB for review.
A Federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor a collection of information
unless OMB approves the collection
under the PRA and the corresponding
information collection instrument
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, no person is required
to comply with, or is subject to penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection
of information if the collection
instrument does not display a currently
valid OMB control number.
In these final regulations, we provide
the control number assigned by OMB to
any information collection
requirements. The information
collection impacted by these regulatory
changes is the Application for the DDRA
and FRA Programs, OMB Control
Number 1840–0005. Under the DDRA
and FRA programs, individual scholars
apply through eligible institutions for an
institutional grant to support the
research fellowship. These institutions
administer the program, in cooperation
with the Department, pursuant to
§§ 102(b)(6) and 104(e)(1) of the Mutual
Educational and Cultural Exchange Act
of 1961 (Fulbright-Hays Act), 34 CFR
parts 662 and 663, the Policy Statements
of the J. William Fulbright Foreign
Scholarship Board (FSB), and the
Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR).
The Department, U.S. foreign
language and area studies specialists,
the U.S. Department of State, U.S.
Embassies, Fulbright Commissions, host
country officials and scholars, and the
FSB use these data. This use is
necessary to determine the academic
qualifications and suitability of the
individual applicant, potential political
sensitivity and feasibility of the project
in the host country, research climate,
and adequacy of the proposed budget.
The Department awards grants under
these programs annually.
The DDRA and FRA application
(1840–0005) will be affected by the
regulatory changes in the following
ways:
• We will change the application
package to eliminate the native language
proficiency exclusion.
• We will include additional
language in the DDRA and FRA
selection criteria (under §§ 662.21(c)(3)
and 663.21(c)(3)) that requires minimal
changes on the technical review forms.
TABLE 2—ESTIMATED BURDEN HOURS
Number of
respondents
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Program
Average
burden hours
per response
Total
burden hours
Estimated
respondent
average
hourly wage
Total annual
costs
(hourly wage
× total
burden hours)
DDRA Student Respondent .................................................
DDRA Institution Project Director ........................................
FRA Faculty Respondent .....................................................
FRA Institution Project Director ...........................................
325
50
70
50
25
25
25
15
8,125
1,250
1,750
750
$0
47.20
36.33
47.20
$0
59,000
63,578
35,400
Annualized total ............................................................
495
........................
11,875
........................
157,978
The hour burden for individual DDRA
student respondents is estimated at an
average of 25 hours for each student.
The cost burden for DDRA student
applicants is zero. We estimated that the
changes to these regulations may result
in a small increase in the number of
DDRA student respondents from 310 to
325 submitting a single application.
When multiplied by 25 hours, this
results in an increase in DDRA student
burden hours from 7,750 to 8,125.
We estimated the hour burden for the
50 DDRA institutional project directors
to be 25 hours for reviewing each DDRA
application for a total burden of 1,250.
The cost burden of $47.20 for
institutional DDRA applicants totals
$59,000. We used feedback from DDRA
respondents during the last three years
to estimate these amounts.
11 44
The hour burden for the 70 individual
FRA respondents is estimated to average
25 hours for each faculty member to
complete the application for a total of
1,750 hours. The cost burden for faculty
applicants at $36.33 totals $63,578.
The hour burden for the 50 FRA
institutional project directors is
estimated to be 15 hours for reviewing
each FRA application for a total burden
of 750 hours. The cost burden for
institutional FRA applicants at $47.20 is
$35,400. These estimates are based on
feedback from FRA respondents during
the last three years.
These estimates incorporate
completion of the following tasks:
1. Register in the G5 e-Application
system (project director);
2. Complete official forms (student/
faculty and project director);
3. Develop the application narrative
and budget (student/faculty);
4. Screen individual completed
applications (project director); and
5. Transmit completed individual
applications to the Department in a
single submission via G5 (project
director).
We note that the hour burdens for the
DDRA and FRA project directors differ
because the FRA program is smaller and
has fewer applicants. DDRA project
directors generally process applications
for multiple students; FRA project
directors generally process an
application for a single faculty member.
The data in Table 2 are an estimate of
the time needed for both institutional
project directors and individual student
and faculty respondents to complete
tasks listed.
U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:05 Dec 07, 2023
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
85507
TABLE 3—COLLECTION OF INFORMATION
Regulatory section
Information collection
OMB Control #1840–0005—estimated burden
34 CFR § 662.21(c)(3) .........
This regulatory provision will require changing the application package to eliminate the native language proficiency exclusion.
34 CFR § 663.21(c)(3) .........
This regulatory provision will require new language in
the DDRA and FRA selection criteria to consider
steps an applicant has taken to improve their language proficiency.
The number of respondents and the number of annual
burden hours will increase to 495 and 11,875 respectively; the annual burden costs will remain at
$157,978.
The number of respondents and the number of annual
burden hours will increase to 495 and 11,875 respectively; the annual burden costs will remain at
$157,978.
We prepared an Information
Collection Request (ICR) for these
changes to the information collection
requirements. We invited the public to
comment on the ICR but did not receive
any comments.
OMB approved the collection of
information contained in these
regulations under OMB Control number
1840–0005 on March 2, 2023.
Intergovernmental Review
The proposed regulations are not
subject to E.O. 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Assessment of Educational Impact
Based on our review, we have
determined that these regulations do not
require transmission of information that
any other agency or authority of the
United States gathers or makes
available.
Federalism
E.O. 13132 requires us to obtain
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. The proposed
regulations do not 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 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:05 Dec 07, 2023
Jkt 262001
www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can
view this document, as well as all other
documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Portable Document Format
(PDF). To use PDF, you must have
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
List of Subjects
34 CFR Part 662
Colleges and universities, Educational
research, Educational study programs,
Grant programs—education,
Scholarships and fellowships.
34 CFR Part 663
Colleges and universities, Educational
research, Educational study programs,
Grant programs—education,
Scholarships and fellowships, Teachers.
Miguel A. Cardona,
Secretary of Education.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Secretary amends parts
662 and 663 of title 34 of the Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 662—FULBRIGHT-HAYS
DOCTORAL DISSERTATION
RESEARCH ABROAD FELLOWSHIP
PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for part 662
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Section 102(b)(6) of the
Fulbright-Hays Act, 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6),
unless otherwise noted.
2. Add § 662.8 to subpart A to read as
follows:
■
§ 662.8
Severability.
If any provision of this part or its
application to any person, act, or
practice is held invalid, the remainder
of the part or the application of its
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
provisions to any person, act, or practice
will not be affected thereby.
■ 3. Amend § 662.21 by:
■ a. Revising paragraphs (c)
introductory text and (c)(3);
■ b. Redesignating paragraph (c)(4) as
(c)(5); and
■ c. Adding a new paragraph (c)(4).
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
§ 662.21 What criteria does the Secretary
use to evaluate an application for a
fellowship?
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Qualifications of the applicant.
The Secretary reviews each application
to determine the qualifications of the
applicant. In coordination with any
priorities established under paragraph
(d) of this section, the Secretary
considers one or more of the
following—
*
*
*
*
*
(3) The applicant’s proficiency in one
or more of the languages (other than
English) of the host country or countries
of research;
(4) The extent to which the
applicant’s academic record
demonstrates steps taken to further
improve advanced language proficiency
to overcome any anticipated language
barriers relative to the proposed
research project;
*
*
*
*
*
PART 663—FULBRIGHT-HAYS
FACULTY RESEARCH ABROAD
FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM
4. The authority citation for part 663
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Section 102(b)(6) of the
Fulbright-Hays Act, 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6),
unless otherwise noted.
5. Add § 663.8 to subpart A to read as
follows:
■
§ 663.8
Severability.
If any provision of this part or its
application to any person, act, or
practice is held invalid, the remainder
of the part or the application of its
provisions to any person, act, or practice
will not be affected thereby.
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
85508
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
January 21, 2024. Final prices are
available under Docket No. R2024–1
(Order No. 6814) on the Postal
Regulatory Commission’s website at
www.prc.gov.
6. Amend § 663.21 by:
a. Revising paragraphs (c)
introductory text and (c)(3);
■ b. Redesignating paragraph (c)(4) as
(c)(5); and
■ c. Adding a new paragraph (c)(4).
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
■
■
§ 663.21 What criteria does the Secretary
use to evaluate an application for a
fellowship?
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Qualifications of the applicant.
The Secretary reviews each application
to determine the qualifications of the
applicant. In coordination with any
priorities established under paragraph
(d) of this section, the Secretary
considers one or more of the
following—
*
*
*
*
*
(3) The applicant’s proficiency in one
or more of the languages (other than
English) of the host country or countries
of research;
(4) The extent to which the
applicant’s academic record
demonstrates steps taken to further
improve advanced language proficiency
to overcome any anticipated language
barriers relative to the proposed
research project;
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2023–26991 Filed 12–7–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 111
New Mailing Standards for Domestic
Mailing Services Products
Postal ServiceTM.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
On October 6, 2023, the Postal
Service (USPS®) filed a notice of
mailing services price adjustments with
the Postal Regulatory Commission
(PRC), effective January 21, 2024. This
final rule contains the revisions to
Mailing Standards of the United States
Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual
(DMM®) to implement the changes
coincident with the price adjustments
and other minor DMM changes.
DATES: Effective January 21, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doriane Harley at (202) 268–2537 or
Dale Kennedy at (202) 268–6592.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 22, 2023, the PRC favorably
reviewed the price adjustments
proposed by the Postal Service. The
price adjustments and DMM revisions
are scheduled to become effective on
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:05 Dec 07, 2023
Jkt 262001
Certificate of Mailing—Automated
Solution
Currently, Certificate of Mailing is
processed manually at the BMEU for
individual pieces of Priority Mail®,
First-Class Mail®, USPS Marketing
Mail®, and Package Services. Certificate
of Mailing provides evidence of mailing
only and does not provide a record of
delivery.
The Postal Service is adding an
automated option for processing forms
3606–D Certificate of Bulk Mailing;
3665 Certificate of Mailing; and 3877
Firm Mailing Book for Accountable Mail
at the BMEU when electronically
uploaded to PostalOne! and payment
via EPS (Enterprise Payment System).
Promotion Eligible Product
Identification
Currently, mailers are unable to see
the discount breakdown at product level
for each promotion; in addition, when a
new promotion is added or an existing
promotion is enhanced, changes applied
to the product line is not readily
available to mailers.
The Postal Service will implement an
update that will enable mailers to see
promotion discounts at the product
level for each promotion as well as
ensure all updates are applied to
applicable systems in sync.
These revisions will provide
consistency within postal products and
add value for customers.
Market Dominant comments on
Proposed changes and USPS responses.
The Postal Service did not receive any
formal comments on the October 2023
proposed rule (88 FR 71329–71332).
The Postal Service adopts the
described changes to Mailing Standards
of the United States Postal Service,
Domestic Mail Manual (DMM),
incorporated by reference in the Code of
Federal Regulations. We will publish an
appropriate amendment to 39 CFR part
111 to reflect these changes.
List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111
Administrative practice and
procedure, Postal Service.
Accordingly, 39 CFR part 111 is
amended as follows:
PART 111—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 39 CFR
part 111 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 13 U.S.C. 301–
307; 18 U.S.C. 1692–1737; 39 U.S.C. 101,
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
401, 403, 404, 414, 416, 3001–3011, 3201–
3219, 3403–3406, 3621, 3622, 3626, 3632,
3633, and 5001.
2. Revise the Mailing Standards of the
United States Postal Service, Domestic
Mail Manual (DMM) as follows:
■
Mailing Standards of the United States
Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual
(DMM)
*
*
*
*
*
203 Basic Postage Statement,
Documentation, and Preparation
Standards
*
*
*
*
*
3.0 Standardized Documentation for
First-Class Mail, Periodicals, USPS
Marketing Mail, and Flat-Size Bound
Printed Matter
*
*
*
*
*
3.2 Format and Content
For First-Class Mail, Periodicals,
USPS Marketing Mail, and Bound
Printed Matter, standardized
documentation includes:
*
*
*
*
*
c. For mail in trays or sacks, list these
required elements:
*
*
*
*
*
[Revise item 203.3.2c(6) to read as
follows:]
6. For all Periodicals mailings,
include a separate ‘‘Entry’’ column
showing the applicable destination
entry discount for those copies using the
entry abbreviations in 3.6.3.
*
*
*
*
*
d. For bundles on pallets, list these
required elements:
*
*
*
*
*
[Revise item 203.3.2d(6) to read as
follows:]
6. For all Periodicals mailings,
include a separate ‘‘Entry’’ column
showing the entry discount for those
copies using the abbreviations in
207.17.4.3. Report foreign copies
separately.
*
*
*
*
*
[Revise the first sentence of the
introductory text of 203.3.2(e) to read as
follows:]
e. At the end of the documentation, a
summary report of the number of pieces
mailed at each price for each mailing by
postage payment method and the
number of pieces in each mailing.* * *
*
*
*
*
*
[Revise the first sentence of item
203.3.2e(4) to read as follows:]
4. A summary of the number of copies
for each entry price.* * *
*
*
*
*
*
[Revise the heading of 3.6 to read as
follows:]
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 235 (Friday, December 8, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 85502-85508]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26991]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Parts 662 and 663
RIN 1840-AD90
Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation Research Abroad Fellowship
Program and Faculty Research Abroad Fellowship Program
AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Education (Department or we) issues
final regulations governing the Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation
Research Abroad (DDRA) Fellowship Program and the Faculty Research
Abroad (FRA) Fellowship Program. This rule revises language proficiency
qualifications for DDRA and FRA applicants and clarifies the
Secretary's discretionary use of eligibility criteria.
DATES: These regulations are effective January 8, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela J. Maimer, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 453-6891. Email: [email protected].
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and
wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7-1-1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The DDRA Fellowship Program provides opportunities for doctoral
students to engage in dissertation research abroad in modern foreign
languages and area studies. The program is designed to contribute to
the development and improvement of the study of modern foreign
languages and area studies in the United States and to increase
scholars' knowledge of the culture of the people in the countries or
regions of research. The program provides fellowships to doctoral
candidates who are planning a teaching career in the United States upon
completion of their programs and who possess sufficient foreign
language skills in the country or countries of research to carry out
the dissertation research project.
The FRA Fellowship Program provides opportunities for faculty
members teaching modern foreign languages or area studies at U.S.
institutions of higher education (IHEs) to engage in research abroad in
those languages or areas studied. The program is designed to contribute
to the faculty members' foreign language skills and to increase
knowledge of the culture of the people in the countries or regions of
research.
On March 21, 2023, the Secretary published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for these parts in the Federal Register.\1\ These
final regulations contain changes from the NPRM, which we explain in
the Analysis of Comments and Changes section of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 88 FR 16924.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the NPRM, the
Department received five comments on the proposed regulations. We
address those comments in the Analysis of Comments and Changes section
below.
Analysis of Comments and Changes
We group issues according to subject, with appropriate sections of
the regulations referenced in parentheses, where applicable. We discuss
other substantive issues under the sections of the regulations to which
they pertain. Generally, we do not address minor, non-substantive
changes (such as renumbering paragraphs, adding a word, or
typographical errors). Additionally, we do not address recommended
changes that the statute does not authorize the Secretary to make or
comments pertaining to operational processes. We generally do not
address comments pertaining to issues that were not within the scope of
the NPRM.
An analysis of the public comments received and the changes to the
regulations since publication of the NPRM follows.
General Support
Comments: Two commenters supported the proposed regulations.
Discussion: We thank the commenters for their support. We believe
these changes maintain the statutory goals and the integrity of the
programs.
Changes: None.
General Opposition
Comments: One commenter objected to the existence of both the DDRA
and the FRA programs.
Discussion: These programs are authorized by statute.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes: None.
Secretarial Discretion (Sec. Sec. 662.21(c) and 663.21(c))
Comments: One commenter asked the Department to explain whether the
proposed rule is intended to merely clarify the Secretary's existing
discretion to vary selection criteria point values assigned to DDRA or
FRA, which was granted in a 2005 rulemaking, or whether the proposed
rule would grant new discretion to the Secretary. If the latter, the
commenter believed that the Department should explain any additional
discretion and give the public an opportunity to comment on the
proposed expansion.
The commenter further opined that, as the Fulbright-Hays Act and
the Department's eligibility regulations require the Secretary to
meaningfully consider foreign language skills, the Department should
finalize Sec. Sec. 662.21(c) and 663.21(c) without the proposed ``one
or more'' phrase in the introductory text or otherwise clarify that the
Secretary may not ignore foreign language skills when awarding
[[Page 85503]]
DDRA and FRA Fellowships. The commenter objected to the proposed rule
to the extent that it would grant discretion to ignore foreign language
skills in the DDRA and FRA competitions.
Lastly, this commenter stated that, if finalized as proposed, the
revisions to Sec. Sec. 662.21(c)(3), 662.21(c)(4), 663.21(c)(3), and
663.21(c)(4) would address the concerns identified in a recent lawsuit
filed on behalf of DDRA applicants \3\ who challenged the weight given
to their respective native languages in the selection process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Lujan v. U.S. Dep't of Educ., No. 3:22-CV-00159-DCG, F.
Supp. 3d__, 2023 WL 2638280 (W.D. Tex. Mar. 24, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discussion: The Department appreciates this commenter's concerns
and wishes to clarify that the additional discretion proposed under
Sec. Sec. 662.21(c) and 663.21(c) to allow the Secretary to consider
``one or more'' of the listed applicant qualification criteria, while
expanding the Secretary's discretion under these particular programs,
is an appropriate exercise of the Secretary's general authority under
34 CFR 75.201 to identify and notify applicants of grant competition
selection criteria (an authority which is routinely used, for example,
across Departmental programs utilizing the general selection criteria
under 34 CFR 75.210) and is consistent with the Fulbright-Hays Act.\4\
The Department would only use this flexibility consistent with the
programs' statutory requirement to ``promot[e] modern foreign language
training and area studies in United States schools[.]'' \5\ The
Department believes that it is able to discharge this requirement and
the purpose of these grants for ``improving [an applicant's] skill in
languages'' within the framework of several of the criteria looking at
the Qualification of an Applicant, and that this duty does not rest
solely on any single criteria under that section. The flexibility to
select ``one or more'' of the applicant qualification criteria under
Sec. Sec. 662.21(c) and 663.21(c) will enhance the Department's
ability to structure its grant competitions to select the most
qualified applicants for funding, because it will allow the Department
to focus from year-to-year on those selection criteria that have
yielded applications from the most qualified candidates. It also will
allow the Department to review the effect of omitting a particular
selection criterion in a given year on the quality of applicants,
without having to go through additional rulemaking to obtain this
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 34 CFR 75.201 (``[i]n the application package or a
notice published in the Federal Register, the Secretary informs
applicants of . . . [t]he selection criteria chosen[.]'').
\5\ 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes: None.
Severability (Sec. Sec. 662.8 and 663.8)
Comments: None.
Discussion: Current regulations in 34 CFR 662 and 663 do not
address severability. The Department seeks to clarify its intent that,
with regard to severability, each of the regulations in 34 CFR parts
662 and 663 and its subparts serves one or more important, related, but
distinct, purposes. To best serve these purposes, we included this
administrative provision in the regulations to make clear that the
regulations are designed to operate independently of each other and to
convey the Department's intent that the potential invalidity of one
provision or any of its subparts should not affect the remainder of the
provisions.
Changes: We have added new severability provisions in Sec. Sec.
662.8 and 663.8.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, the Secretary must determine
whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore,
subject to the requirements of the E.O. and subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of E.O. 12866, as
amended by E.O. 14094, 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 $200 million or more
(adjusted every three years by the Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for changes in gross domestic
product); or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector
of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment,
public health or safety, or state, local, territorial, or Tribal
governments or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise legal or policy issues for which centralized review would
meaningfully further the President's priorities or the principles
stated in the Executive order, as specifically authorized in a timely
manner by the Administrator of OIRA in each case.
This final regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
(as amended by E.O. 14094).
We have also reviewed these regulations under E.O. 13563, which
supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and
definitions governing regulatory review established in E.O. 12866. To
the extent permitted by law, E.O. 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 providing
information that enables the public to make choices.
E.O. 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and
costs as accurately as possible.'' OMB's OIRA has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
The Department has assessed the potential costs and benefits, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this regulatory action, and we are
issuing these final requirements only on a reasoned determination that
their benefits justify their costs. In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize
net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows and the reasons stated
elsewhere in this document, the Department believes that the final
requirements are consistent with the principles in E.O. 13563.
[[Page 85504]]
We also have determined that this regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with state, local, territorial, or Tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
In this regulatory impact analysis, we discuss the need for
regulatory action, the potential costs and benefits, and net budget
impacts.
Elsewhere, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), we
identify and explain burdens specifically associated with information
collection requirements.
Need for Regulatory Action
The Department amends the DDRA and FRA program regulations to
promote fairness in the application review process for native speakers
of languages other than English. These revisions are also consistent
with the statutory framework for the DDRA and FRA programs and are
necessary to support the statutory goal of ``promoting modern foreign
language training and area studies in United States schools[.]'' \6\
Additionally, revising the introductory language of Sec. Sec.
662.21(c) and 663.21(c) to allow consideration of ``one or more'' of
the listed criteria will enable the Department to administer these
competitive grant programs in a manner that prioritizes the most
qualified applicants for funding. Finally, the addition of severability
clauses to the regulations for these programs will enable the
Department to administer these programs more effectively if a component
of the regulations is invalidated by a court.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discussion of Costs, Benefits, and Transfers
The Department believes this regulatory action will not impose
significant new cost-bearing requirements on IHEs or other entities. We
also believe that the benefits of implementing this regulatory action
outweigh any associated costs.
We anticipate a minimal increase of 10-15 DDRA and FRA program
applications as a result of eliminating the native language proficiency
exclusion and foresee minimal impact on the Department's time and cost
for reviewing these additional applications.
Over the last 5 years, the amount of annual funding for the DDRA
program has ranged from approximately $3.4 to $5.5 million, with an
average of 200 grant applications received per year, and an average of
50 percent of applications ultimately receiving grant awards. With the
changes to the regulation, the Department expects an increase of 10-15
applications per year, based on the number of applicants that have
applied to study a geographic area that shares their native language
skills in recent years.
An increase in the number of applicants or awards granted could
result in additional costs to the Department in securing readers to
review applications, but if additional costs arise, they will be
minimal. The Department pays readers $1,200 to review applications, and
the number of applications per reader ranges from 15 to a maximum of
22. An increase in 10-15 applications could increase costs by an
additional $1,200 to secure an additional reader. However, the number
of DDRA applications has declined over the last several years from a
high of almost 250 to a low of just more than 150 in 2022. As a result,
an increase in immediate applications would not result in any overall
comparative additional costs, as a nominal increase in applications
will restore DDRA to the average amount of applications received in
prior years. We anticipate no additional costs to grant recipients, as
we will continue to pay for grant activities with program funds. We
also note that program participation is voluntary.
In fiscal year (FY) 2022, the Department conducted an FRA
competition and awarded 22 recipients a total of approximately $1.3
million. The FY 2022 competition was the first FRA competition in more
than 10 years. The Fulbright-Hays appropriation decreased from $15.6
million in FY 2010 to $7.5 million in FY 2011; the nearly 50 percent
decrease in available funding hindered our ability to conduct
competitions and make awards under all four Fulbright-Hays programs.
The result was a suspension of the FRA program from 2011 to 2021.
Between 2011 and 2021, the funding level for the Fulbright-Hays
programs averaged $7.4 million. In FY 2022, the amount increased to
$9.8 million, which enabled us to re-activate the FRA program. Although
we will not conduct the FRA competition in FY 2023, we do anticipate
conducting another FRA competition in FY 2024, contingent upon funding
availability. Given that we held only one FRA competition in the last
10 years, we cannot discuss potential trends in those program
applications or potential corresponding costs.
The benefits of these final regulations include better aligning
DDRA and FRA applicant qualifications with other comparable grant
programs to focus on overall language proficiency and increasing
equitable access to research abroad for those demonstrating language
proficiency in the language of the countries in which their doctoral-
level or faculty research study will occur. This will apply regardless
of the applicant's native language. Additionally, we expect that the
regulations will lead to an increase in the number of applications
overall, which will make the program more competitive and enable the
Department to fund even higher quality applications. The increase in
applications specifically from individuals with native languages other
than English will yield additional applications from individuals
speaking a wider variety of native languages, as well as more
applications recommended for funding from these individuals. These
regulations will also more fully account for proficiency by adding a
new selection criterion that considers an applicant's academic record.
Under this criterion, we will consider any steps the applicant has
taken to improve proficiency in the language of study and ensure
adequate preparation for the proposed research project. We believe this
criterion will support the programmatic goal of the DDRA and FRA to
promote training ``in United States schools, colleges, and
universities.'' Allowing applicants to show steps taken to improve
their language proficiency in an academic setting will better
demonstrate their ability to study in that language abroad. This change
may also encourage applicants to complete additional training as a way
to strengthen their application.
Finally, providing Secretarial discretion to determine the factors
that will be considered when reviewing the qualifications of applicants
would increase flexibility to implement the program within statutory
requirements while adapting to changing Departmental priorities for
international and foreign language education. This change will align
DDRA and FRA with other Departmental programs that provide discretion
to the Secretary to select among the regulated selection criteria when
deciding which criteria to emphasize in a competition year.
We do not anticipate any cost to the Federal government as a result
of this particular change, beyond nominal costs associated with
updating the application package. We do not expect any impact on the
number of applications received as a result of this change, nor do we
anticipate any costs to grant recipients. Accordingly, we do not
anticipate any burden cost with the addition of this particular
criterion.
[[Page 85505]]
Net Budget Impacts
These proposed regulations are not estimated to have a significant
net impact on the Federal budget. As noted above, the Department
estimates that these final regulations will not result in additional
net costs.
Alternatives Considered
In addition to allowing native speakers to receive points based on
Sec. Sec. 662.21(c)(3) and 663.21(c)(3), we considered allowing
English as the language for the country of research, which is currently
restricted. We did not take that approach because we believe
maintaining the requirement that applicants demonstrate proficiency in
a language ``other than English'' more appropriately meets the
statutory goal of ``promoting modern foreign language training and area
studies in United States schools[.]'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also considered continuing to solely provide points for language
proficiency without consideration of additional steps taken to improve
proficiency. We did not take that approach because we believe that
including a criterion that considers steps taken to improve proficiency
in a domestic academic setting better meets the statutory goal of
promoting training ``in United States schools, colleges, and
universities'' \8\ and will better demonstrate applicants' ability to
study in that language abroad. This change may also encourage
applicants to complete additional training as a way to strengthen their
application. Additionally, we believe that replacing the exclusion for
native language skills other than English with a focus on both an
applicant's current foreign language skills and efforts to master the
language of study will be more effective in increasing the capabilities
and diversity of applicants and participants, while remaining
consistent with the statutory goals of these programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies under the Regulatory Flexibility Act \9\
that these regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of ``small entities.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The small entities that will be affected by the proposed
regulations are IHEs that submit applications to the Department under
this program. The final regulations will not have a significant
economic impact on the small entities affected because they will not
impose excessive regulatory burdens or require unnecessary Federal
supervision. The final regulations will impose minimal requirements to
ensure the proper expenditure of program funds.
In the NPRM, we invited the public to comment on our proposed
certification that these regulations would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. We did not
receive any comments on this subject.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines ``small
institution'' using data on revenue, market dominance, tax filing
status, governing body, and population. Most entities to which the
Office of Postsecondary Education's regulations apply are postsecondary
institutions. However, we do not require institutions to report such
data to the Department. As a result, for purposes of this final rule,
the Department defines ``small entities'' by reference to enrollment to
allow meaningful comparison of regulatory impact across all types of
higher education institutions.\10\ We consider two-year postsecondary
educational institutions with enrollment of fewer than 500 full-time
equivalent (FTE) and 4-year postsecondary educational institutions with
enrollment of fewer than 1,000 FTE to be small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ In some prior regulations, the Department categorized small
businesses based on tax status. Those regulations defined ``non-
profit organizations'' as ``small organizations'' if they were
independently owned and operated and not dominant in their field of
operation, or as ``small entities'' if they were institutions
controlled by governmental entities with populations below 50,000.
Those definitions resulted in the categorization of all private
nonprofit organizations as small and no public institutions as
small. Under the previous definition, proprietary institutions were
considered small if they were independently owned and operated and
not dominant in their field of operation with total annual revenue
below $7,000,000.
Table 1--Small Institutions Under Enrollment-Based Definition
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of
Type Small Total total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proprietary..................................................... 1,973 2,331 85
2-year...................................................... 1,734 1,990 87
4-year...................................................... 239 341 70
Private not-for-profit.......................................... 983 1,831 54
2-year...................................................... 185 203 91
4-year...................................................... 798 1,628 49
Public.......................................................... 380 1,924 20
2-year...................................................... 317 1,145 28
4-year...................................................... 63 779 8
-----------------------------------------------
Total................................................... 3,336 6,086 55
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Department analysis of 2020-21 IPEDS data.
The Department used Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System
(IPEDS) data from fiscal year 2020 reported under the finance data
category. This reporting does not include all participating
institutions and provides approximate data.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act also requires us to estimate the
effect of the final regulations on small entities. We identified 27 of
the 97 affected entities as small. As noted above, we estimated that
this final rule will result in benefits for all affected entities
without regulatory burden. We estimated that small institutions will,
on average, see an increase of approximately $952,400 in funding.
Similarly, we projected that non-small institutions will receive an
increase of approximately $407,900.
In terms of regulatory impact, these regulations are designed to
avoid excessive burdens or unnecessary Federal supervision. The minimal
cost that these regulations will impose are those associated with
grantees' obligation to certify participant eligibility and safeguard
the proper expenditure of program funds. Consequently, the Department
certifies
[[Page 85506]]
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
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 PRA.\11\ This helps to 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sections 662.21(c)(3) and 663.21(c)(3) of the regulations contain
information collection requirements. Under the PRA, the Department
submitted a copy of these sections to OMB for review.
A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of
information unless OMB approves the collection under the PRA and the
corresponding information collection instrument displays a currently
valid OMB control number. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
no person is required to comply with, or is subject to penalty for
failure to comply with, a collection of information if the collection
instrument does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
In these final regulations, we provide the control number assigned
by OMB to any information collection requirements. The information
collection impacted by these regulatory changes is the Application for
the DDRA and FRA Programs, OMB Control Number 1840-0005. Under the DDRA
and FRA programs, individual scholars apply through eligible
institutions for an institutional grant to support the research
fellowship. These institutions administer the program, in cooperation
with the Department, pursuant to Sec. Sec. 102(b)(6) and 104(e)(1) of
the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 (Fulbright-
Hays Act), 34 CFR parts 662 and 663, the Policy Statements of the J.
William Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board (FSB), and the Education
Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR).
The Department, U.S. foreign language and area studies specialists,
the U.S. Department of State, U.S. Embassies, Fulbright Commissions,
host country officials and scholars, and the FSB use these data. This
use is necessary to determine the academic qualifications and
suitability of the individual applicant, potential political
sensitivity and feasibility of the project in the host country,
research climate, and adequacy of the proposed budget.
The Department awards grants under these programs annually.
The DDRA and FRA application (1840-0005) will be affected by the
regulatory changes in the following ways:
We will change the application package to eliminate the
native language proficiency exclusion.
We will include additional language in the DDRA and FRA
selection criteria (under Sec. Sec. 662.21(c)(3) and 663.21(c)(3))
that requires minimal changes on the technical review forms.
Table 2--Estimated Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Total annual
Number of Average burden Total burden respondent costs (hourly
Program respondents hours per hours average hourly wage x total
response wage burden hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DDRA Student Respondent......... 325 25 8,125 $0 $0
DDRA Institution Project 50 25 1,250 47.20 59,000
Director.......................
FRA Faculty Respondent.......... 70 25 1,750 36.33 63,578
FRA Institution Project Director 50 15 750 47.20 35,400
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized total............ 495 .............. 11,875 .............. 157,978
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hour burden for individual DDRA student respondents is
estimated at an average of 25 hours for each student. The cost burden
for DDRA student applicants is zero. We estimated that the changes to
these regulations may result in a small increase in the number of DDRA
student respondents from 310 to 325 submitting a single application.
When multiplied by 25 hours, this results in an increase in DDRA
student burden hours from 7,750 to 8,125.
We estimated the hour burden for the 50 DDRA institutional project
directors to be 25 hours for reviewing each DDRA application for a
total burden of 1,250. The cost burden of $47.20 for institutional DDRA
applicants totals $59,000. We used feedback from DDRA respondents
during the last three years to estimate these amounts.
The hour burden for the 70 individual FRA respondents is estimated
to average 25 hours for each faculty member to complete the application
for a total of 1,750 hours. The cost burden for faculty applicants at
$36.33 totals $63,578.
The hour burden for the 50 FRA institutional project directors is
estimated to be 15 hours for reviewing each FRA application for a total
burden of 750 hours. The cost burden for institutional FRA applicants
at $47.20 is $35,400. These estimates are based on feedback from FRA
respondents during the last three years.
These estimates incorporate completion of the following tasks:
1. Register in the G5 e-Application system (project director);
2. Complete official forms (student/faculty and project director);
3. Develop the application narrative and budget (student/faculty);
4. Screen individual completed applications (project director); and
5. Transmit completed individual applications to the Department in
a single submission via G5 (project director).
We note that the hour burdens for the DDRA and FRA project
directors differ because the FRA program is smaller and has fewer
applicants. DDRA project directors generally process applications for
multiple students; FRA project directors generally process an
application for a single faculty member.
The data in Table 2 are an estimate of the time needed for both
institutional project directors and individual student and faculty
respondents to complete tasks listed.
[[Page 85507]]
Table 3--Collection of Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB Control #1840-0005--estimated
Regulatory section Information collection burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
34 CFR Sec. 662.21(c)(3)............... This regulatory provision will The number of respondents and the
require changing the application number of annual burden hours
package to eliminate the native will increase to 495 and 11,875
language proficiency exclusion. respectively; the annual burden
costs will remain at $157,978.
34 CFR Sec. 663.21(c)(3)............... This regulatory provision will The number of respondents and the
require new language in the DDRA number of annual burden hours
and FRA selection criteria to will increase to 495 and 11,875
consider steps an applicant has respectively; the annual burden
taken to improve their language costs will remain at $157,978.
proficiency.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We prepared an Information Collection Request (ICR) for these
changes to the information collection requirements. We invited the
public to comment on the ICR but did not receive any comments.
OMB approved the collection of information contained in these
regulations under OMB Control number 1840-0005 on March 2, 2023.
Intergovernmental Review
The proposed regulations are not subject to E.O. 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
Assessment of Educational Impact
Based on our review, we have determined that these regulations do
not require transmission of information that any other agency or
authority of the United States gathers or makes available.
Federalism
E.O. 13132 requires us to obtain 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.
The proposed regulations do not 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 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.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
List of Subjects
34 CFR Part 662
Colleges and universities, Educational research, Educational study
programs, Grant programs--education, Scholarships and fellowships.
34 CFR Part 663
Colleges and universities, Educational research, Educational study
programs, Grant programs--education, Scholarships and fellowships,
Teachers.
Miguel A. Cardona,
Secretary of Education.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Secretary amends
parts 662 and 663 of title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 662--FULBRIGHT-HAYS DOCTORAL DISSERTATION RESEARCH ABROAD
FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for part 662 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Section 102(b)(6) of the Fulbright-Hays Act, 22
U.S.C. 2452(b)(6), unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Add Sec. 662.8 to subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 662.8 Severability.
If any provision of this part or its application to any person,
act, or practice is held invalid, the remainder of the part or the
application of its provisions to any person, act, or practice will not
be affected thereby.
0
3. Amend Sec. 662.21 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (c) introductory text and (c)(3);
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (c)(4) as (c)(5); and
0
c. Adding a new paragraph (c)(4).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 662.21 What criteria does the Secretary use to evaluate an
application for a fellowship?
* * * * *
(c) Qualifications of the applicant. The Secretary reviews each
application to determine the qualifications of the applicant. In
coordination with any priorities established under paragraph (d) of
this section, the Secretary considers one or more of the following--
* * * * *
(3) The applicant's proficiency in one or more of the languages
(other than English) of the host country or countries of research;
(4) The extent to which the applicant's academic record
demonstrates steps taken to further improve advanced language
proficiency to overcome any anticipated language barriers relative to
the proposed research project;
* * * * *
PART 663--FULBRIGHT-HAYS FACULTY RESEARCH ABROAD FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM
0
4. The authority citation for part 663 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Section 102(b)(6) of the Fulbright-Hays Act, 22
U.S.C. 2452(b)(6), unless otherwise noted.
0
5. Add Sec. 663.8 to subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 663.8 Severability.
If any provision of this part or its application to any person,
act, or practice is held invalid, the remainder of the part or the
application of its provisions to any person, act, or practice will not
be affected thereby.
[[Page 85508]]
0
6. Amend Sec. 663.21 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (c) introductory text and (c)(3);
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (c)(4) as (c)(5); and
0
c. Adding a new paragraph (c)(4).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 663.21 What criteria does the Secretary use to evaluate an
application for a fellowship?
* * * * *
(c) Qualifications of the applicant. The Secretary reviews each
application to determine the qualifications of the applicant. In
coordination with any priorities established under paragraph (d) of
this section, the Secretary considers one or more of the following--
* * * * *
(3) The applicant's proficiency in one or more of the languages
(other than English) of the host country or countries of research;
(4) The extent to which the applicant's academic record
demonstrates steps taken to further improve advanced language
proficiency to overcome any anticipated language barriers relative to
the proposed research project;
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-26991 Filed 12-7-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
