Research and Development Infrastructure Grant, 58287-58291 [2024-15537]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 138 / Thursday, July 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
exportation, reexportation, or transfer
(in-country) to the Russian Federation of
such software is licensed or otherwise
authorized by the Department of
Commerce; or
(ii) Not subject to the EAR and for
which the exportation, reexportation, or
transfer (in-country) to the Russian
Federation of such software would be
eligible for a license exception or
otherwise authorized by the Department
of Commerce if it were subject to the
EAR.
This determination shall take effect
beginning at 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight
time on September 12, 2024.
Bradley T. Smith,
Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control.
[FR Doc. 2024–15709 Filed 7–17–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–AL–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter VI
[Docket ID ED–2024–OPE–0065]
Research and Development
Infrastructure Grant
Office of Postsecondary
Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final priorities, requirements,
and definitions.
AGENCY:
The Department of Education
(Department) issues priorities,
requirements, and definitions for use in
the Research and Development
Infrastructure (RDI) grant program. The
Department may use one or more of
these priorities, requirements, and
definitions for competitions in fiscal
year (FY) 2024 and later years. We
intend for these priorities, requirements,
and definitions to help Historically
Black Colleges and Universities
(HBCUs), Tribal Controlled Colleges and
Universities (TCCUs), and MinorityServing Institutions (MSIs) implement
transformational investments in
research infrastructure, including
research productivity, faculty expertise,
graduate programs, physical
infrastructure, human capital
development, and partnerships leading
to increases in external funding.
DATES: These priorities, requirements,
and definitions are effective August 19,
2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jason Cottrell, Ph.D., U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 5C122, Washington, DC 20202–
4260. Telephone: (202) 453–7530.
Email: Jason.Cottrell@ed.gov.
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or
have a speech disability and wish to
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:44 Jul 17, 2024
Jkt 262001
access telecommunications relay
services, please dial 7–1–1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of Program: The RDI grant
program is designed to provide HBCUs,
TCCUs, and MSIs, including Asian
American and Native American Pacific
Islander Serving Institutions
(AANAPISIs), Alaska Native and Native
Hawaiian Serving Institutions (ANNH),
Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs),
Native American Serving Non-Tribal
Institutions (NASNTIs), and
Predominantly Black Institutions (PBIs),
and consortia led by an eligible
institution of higher education, with
funds to implement transformational
investments in research infrastructure,
including research productivity, faculty
expertise, graduate programs, physical
infrastructure, human capital
development, and partnerships leading
to increases in external and sustained
funding.
Assistance Listing Number: 84.116H.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1138–
1138d.
We published a notice of proposed
priorities, requirements, and definitions
in the Federal Register on May 17, 2024
(89 FR 43352) (NPP). That document
contained background information and
the Department’s reasons for proposing
the particular priorities, requirements,
and definitions. There is one
substantive difference between the
proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions and these final priorities,
requirements, and definitions.
We have added Priority 5, as
described below.
Public Comment: In response to our
invitation in the NPP, six parties
submitted comments on the proposed
priorities, requirements, and definitions.
Generally, we do not address technical
and other minor changes, or suggested
changes that the law does not authorize
us to make under applicable statutory
authority. In addition, we do not
address general comments that raised
concerns not directly related to the
proposed priorities, requirements, or
definitions.
Analysis of Comments and Changes:
An analysis of the comments and of any
changes in the priorities, requirements,
and definitions since publication of the
NPP follows.
Priorities
Comments: One commenter suggested
that we modify Proposed Priority 1 to
support schools that demonstrate
intention and realistic capacity to move
from any research status under the
American Council on Education’s
Carnegie Classification System to
classification as a Research College and
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
58287
University (RCU) or a Doctoral
University with High Research Activity
(R2), rather than limiting support to
RCU and R2 institutions seeking to
move up to classification as R2 or
Doctoral University with Very High
Research Activity (R1), respectively.
The commenter suggested that, if an
applicant can demonstrate a realistic
prospect of movement into R1, it
already has a substantial level of
research and development infrastructure
and financial capacity.
Discussion: The purpose of the RDI
grant program is to support institutions
that have limited resources and diverse
student enrollments—as the eligible
entities, HBCUs, TCCUs, and MSIs, do—
with funds to implement
transformational investments in
research infrastructure to move into R2
or R1 status. Attaining R2 or R1 status
assists institutions with recruiting top
students and faculty, funding top-of-theline facilities to conduct research, and
producing and disseminating cuttingedge knowledge. While we recognize
that a wide range of institutions,
regardless of Carnegie classification,
could benefit from additional
investments in research and
development (R&D) infrastructure, the
Department believes that these limited
funds have the greatest potential to
transform R&D infrastructure at
institutions if they are targeted to
support institutions in making steps
towards R2 and R1 status under the
Carnegie Classification System. The
funding is designed to help institutions
move towards R2 or R1 status,
regardless of how close they are to
achieving it.
Changes: None.
Comments: One commenter proposed
amending Proposed Priority 4 to align
the Pell Grant recipient threshold from
the proposed 50 percent of
undergraduate students to the current
Department of Education Office of
Postsecondary Education standards for
Title III and Title V grant programs. The
commenter stated that this change
would, by aligning requirements across
Department programs, ease
administrative burden on institutions.
Discussion: The 50 percent Pell
recipient threshold in Priority 4 is a
higher bar than either of the metrics
used for eligibility for titles III and V
programs. To be designated as eligible to
apply under the titles III and V
programs, institutions must demonstrate
high enrollment of needy students by
meeting either of the following two
criteria: (1) at least 50 percent of its
degree-seeking students received
financial assistance under the Federal
Pell Grant, Federal Supplemental
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
58288
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 138 / Thursday, July 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Educational Opportunity Grant
(FSEOG), or Federal Work Study (FWS)
programs; or (2) the percentage of its
undergraduate degree-seeking students
who were enrolled on at least a halftime basis and received Federal Pell
Grants exceeded the median percentage
of undergraduate degree students who
were enrolled on at least a half-time
basis and received Federal Pell Grants at
comparable institutions that offer
similar instruction. For purposes of this
priority, we believe this higher standard
is appropriate because the explanatory
statement originally authorizing funding
for this program, contained within
Division H of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117–
328), specified that these grants are
intended to provide ‘‘transformational’’
investments to improve institutions’
R&D infrastructure. The Department
believes these funds have the highest
potential to transform an institution’s
R&D infrastructure if they are targeted to
the institutions with the fewest
resources that enroll the highest
percentages of needy students. We do
not believe that this metric imposes any
burden upon applicants because the
Department will use administrative data
to calculate the Pell percentage for
applicant institutions.
Changes: None.
Comments: None.
Discussion: As we stated in the NPP,
TCCUs currently have their own
Carnegie classification and are not
included in the R1, R2, or RCU
classifications. Accordingly, we
proposed Priority 2 for TCCUs, which
uses an alternative measure of their R&D
infrastructure. Since publication of the
NPP, the American Council on
Education announced that starting in
2025, TCCUs will be included in the
same classification system as HBCUs,
MSIs, and other institutions.1 Therefore,
we are adding a priority for TCCUs that
mirrors the priorities for HBCUs and
MSIs for use following the change to the
Carnegie classifications, while
maintaining Priority 2 so that the grant
program can support TCCUs until such
change occurs.
Changes: We have added Priority 5 to
support projects proposed by TCCUs to
implement high-quality transformative
research capacity initiatives designed to
move the institution from R2 to R1, or
from RCU to R2, research activity status.
Requirements
Comments: Three commenters
suggested changes to the match and
1 2025 Research Designations FAQs—CARNEGIE
CLASSIFICATION OF INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER
EDUCATION (acenet.edu).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:44 Jul 17, 2024
Jkt 262001
waiver requirements. Two commenters
proposed eliminating the match and
waiver requirements, and another
commenter suggested that schools
applying under Priorities 2 or 4 should
be exempt automatically from the match
requirement.
Discussion: We believe that a match
requirement will help ensure that there
is sufficient institutional investment in
the work supported by the grant to
achieve and sustain a transformational
impact. We recognize that some
applicants will have fewer resources,
which is the reason we include the
exceptions. Rather than creating
exceptions for some types of
institutions, we think it is simpler to
have a general matching requirement
and allow low-resourced schools to
qualify for a waiver.
Changes: None.
Comments: One commenter suggested
that we revise Proposed Requirement 1,
Use of Funds, to include ‘‘humanities’’
under allowable activity 1 and that we
further specify that faculty development
under activity 14 must improve or
enhance faculty capacity to manage R&D
projects in fields of research for which
funds have been awarded under this
program.
Discussion: Under activity 1, grantees
may use funds to improve infrastructure
relating to the enumerated fields, as
well as ‘‘other disciplines.’’ The
humanities would constitute another
discipline under this allowable use of
funds, and, accordingly, no change is
required. We designed activity 14
relating to faculty professional
development to allow for broad support,
based on the specific needs of the
faculty in the context of the particular
project. We do not think that being more
prescriptive would benefit grantees.
Changes: None.
Comments: One commenter
recommended not restricting the
indirect cost rate.
Discussion: The indirect cost
reimbursement is limited to 8 percent of
a modified total direct cost base. The
Department proposed this limitation in
order to maximize the Federal resources
that support direct costs associated with
the project.
Changes: None.
Definitions
Comments: One commenter suggested
that the definition for Research Colleges
and Universities (RCUs) should include
an option to use data from an
institution’s annual financial statements
instead of data from the National
Science Foundation (NSF) Higher
Education Research and Development
(HERD) survey.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Discussion: To ensure that the
program is supporting transformational
investments in R&D infrastructure,
consistent with the Explanatory
Statement for this program, the
Department is using the Carnegie
Classifications for Institutional Research
to determine an institution’s current
level of research activity. We believe
this is the best measure because of the
standardization for doctoral degree
production and the measures of
institutional dollars expended by the
institution annually. Because Carnegie
classifications are based on data from
the NSF HERD survey, using this
measure ensures consistency in how we
assess institutional research activity.
Changes: None.
Final Priorities
The Secretary establishes the
following priorities for use in the RDI
grant program.
Priority 1: Funding for Historically
Black Colleges and Universities’
Research and Development
Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by HBCUs to
implement high-quality transformative
research capacity initiatives and
designed to move the institution from
R2 to R1, or from RCU to R2, research
activity status.
Priority 2: Funding for Tribal
Controlled Colleges and Universities’
Research and Development
Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by TCCUs to
improve their research and development
activities, including infrastructure,
faculty development, and academic
programs.
Priority 3: Funding for MinorityServing Institutions’ Research and
Development Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by MSIs to
implement high-quality transformative
research capacity initiatives and
designed to move the institution from
R2 to R1, or from RCU to R2, research
activity status.
Priority 4: MSI Pell Grant Percentage.
Projects proposed by lead applicants
with an enrollment of Pell Grant
recipients that accounts for 50 percent
or higher of their undergraduate student
enrollment, as measured by the
Department using the most recent data
available in the Integrated
Postsecondary Education Data System
(IPEDS).
Priority 5: Funding for Tribal
Controlled Colleges and Universities’
Research And Development
Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by TCCUs to
implement high-quality transformative
research capacity initiatives and
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 138 / Thursday, July 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
designed to move the institution from
R2 to R1, or from RCU to R2, research
activity status.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a
competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each
priority as absolute, competitive
preference, or invitational through a
notice in the Federal Register. The
effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute
priority, we consider only applications
that meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority:
Under a competitive preference priority,
we give competitive preference to an
application by (1) awarding additional
points, depending on the extent to
which the application meets the priority
(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting
an application that meets the priority
over an application of comparable merit
that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an
invitational priority, we are particularly
interested in applications that meet the
priority. However, we do not give an
application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34
CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Final Requirements
The Secretary establishes the
following requirements for use in the
RDI grant program.
Requirement 1—Use of Funds.
Grantees must conduct one or more of
the following activities:
(1) Providing for the improvement of
infrastructure existing on the date of the
grant award, including deferred
maintenance, or the establishment of
new physical infrastructure, including
instructional program spaces,
laboratories, and research facilities
relating to the fields of science,
technology, engineering, the arts,
mathematics, health, agriculture,
education, medicine, law, and other
disciplines.
(2) Hiring and retaining faculty,
students, research-related staff, or other
personnel, including research personnel
skilled in operating, using, or applying
technology, equipment, or devices to
conduct or support research.
(3) Supporting research internships
and fellowships for students, including
undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral positions, which may include
providing direct student financial
assistance and other supports to such
students.
(4) Creating new, or expanding
existing, academic positions, including
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:44 Jul 17, 2024
Jkt 262001
internships, fellowships, and postdoctoral positions, in fields of research
for which research and development
infrastructure funds have been awarded
to the grantee under this program.
(5) Creating and supporting inter- and
intra-institutional research centers
(including formal and informal
communities of practice) in fields of
research for which research and
development infrastructure funds have
been awarded to the grantee under this
program, including hiring staff,
purchasing supplies and equipment,
and funding travel to relevant
conferences and seminars to support the
work of such centers.
(6) Building new institutional support
structures and departments that help
faculty learn about, and increase faculty
and student access to, Federal research
and development grant funds and nonFederal academic research grants.
(7) Building data and collaboration
infrastructure so that early findings and
research can be securely shared to
facilitate peer review and other
appropriate collaboration.
(8) Providing programs of study and
courses in fields of research for which
research and development infrastructure
funds have been awarded to the grantee
under this program.
(9) Paying operating and
administrative expenses for, and
coordinating project partnerships with
members of, the consortium on behalf of
which the eligible institution has
received a grant under this program,
provided that grantees may not pay for
the expenses of any R1 institutions that
are members of the consortia.
(10) Installing or extending the life
and usability of basic systems and
components of campus facilities related
to research, including high-speed
broadband internet infrastructure
sufficient to support digital and
technology-based learning.
(11) Expanding, remodeling,
renovating, or altering biomedical and
behavioral research facilities existing on
the date of the grant award that received
support under section 404I of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 283k).
(12) Acquiring and installing
furniture, fixtures, and instructional
research-related equipment and
technology for academic instruction in
campus facilities in fields of research for
which research and development
infrastructure funds have been awarded
to the grantee under this program.
(13) Providing increased funding to
programs that support research and
development at the eligible institution
that are funded by the National
Institutes of Health, including through
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
58289
their Path to Excellence and Innovation
program.
(14) Faculty professional
development.
(15) Planning purposes.
Requirement 2—Indirect Cost Rate
Information. A grantee’s indirect cost
reimbursement is limited to 8 percent of
a modified total direct cost base. For
more information regarding indirect
costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect
cost rate, please see www.ed.gov/about/
offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
Requirement 3—Matching
Requirements and Exceptions. Grantees
must provide a 1:1 match, which can
include in-kind donations. The
Secretary may waive the matching
requirement on a case-by-case basis
upon a showing of any of the following
exceptional circumstances:
(i) The difficulty of raising matching
funds for a program to serve an area
with high rates of poverty in the lead
applicant’s geographic location, defined
as a Census tract, a set of contiguous
Census tracts, an American Indian
Reservation, Oklahoma Tribal Statistical
Area (as defined by the U.S. Census
Bureau), Alaska Native Village
Statistical Area or Alaska Native
Regional Corporation Area, Native
Hawaiian Homeland Area, or other
Tribal land or county that has a poverty
rate of at least 25 percent as determined
every 5 years using American
Community Survey 5-Year data;
(ii) Serving a significant population of
students from low-income backgrounds
at the lead applicant location, defined as
at least 50 percent (or the eligibility
threshold for the appropriate
institutional sector available at https://
www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/
idues/eligibility.html#app) of degreeseeking enrolled students receiving
need-based grant aid under Title IV of
the HEA;
(iii) Significant economic hardship as
demonstrated by low average
educational and general expenditures
per full-time equivalent undergraduate
student at the lead applicant institution,
in comparison with the average
educational and general expenditures
per full-time equivalent undergraduate
student of institutions that offer similar
instruction without need of a waiver, as
determined by the Secretary in
accordance with the annual process for
designation of eligible Titles III and V
institutions; or
(iv) Information that otherwise
demonstrates a commitment to the longterm sustainability of the applicant’s
projects, such as evidence of a
consortium relationship with an R1
institution, a State bond, State
matching, planning documents such as
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
58290
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 138 / Thursday, July 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
a campus plan, multi-year faculty hiring
plan, support of industry, Federal grants
received, or a demonstration of
institutional commitment that may
include commitment from the
institution’s board.
Requirement 4: Limitation on Grant
Awards. The Department will only make
awards to applicants that are not the
individual or lead applicant in a current
active grant from the RDI grant program.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
The Secretary establishes the
following definitions for use in the RDI
grant program.
Research 1: Very High Research
Spending and Doctorate Production (R1)
means that an institution has spent at
least $50 million in total research and
development (R&D) in a year, as
reported to the National Science
Foundation (NSF) Higher Education
Research and Development (HERD)
Survey, and awarded at least 70
research/scholarship doctorates in a
year, as reported to IPEDS.
Research 2: High Research Spending
and Doctorate Production (R2) means
that an institution has spent at least $5
million in total R&D in a year, as
reported to the NSF HERD Survey, and
awarded at least 20 research/scholarship
doctorates in a year, as reported to
IPEDS. It does not include institutions
designated R1.
Research Colleges and Universities
(RCU) means that an institution has
spent at least $2.5 million in total R&D
in a year, as reported to the NSF HERD
Survey. It does not include institutions
designated R1 or R2.
Historically Black College or
University means an institution that
meets the eligibility requirements under
section 322(2) of the Higher Education
Act of 1965, as amended (HEA).
Minority-Serving Institution means an
institution that is eligible to receive
assistance under sections 317 through
320 of part A of title III, or under title
V of the HEA.
Tribal Controlled Colleges or
Universities has the meaning ascribed it
in section 316(b)(3) of the HEA.
Underrepresented students means
students enrolled in postsecondary,
career, or technical education who are
in one or more of the following
subgroups: (i) A student from a lowincome background. (ii) A student who
is American Indian, Alaska Native,
Asian American, Black, Hispanic or
Latino, Native Hawaiian, and/or Pacific
Islander.
This document does not preclude us
from proposing additional priorities,
requirements, definitions, or selection
15:44 Jul 17, 2024
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
14094
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Final Definitions
VerDate Sep<11>2014
criteria, subject to meeting applicable
rulemaking requirements.
Note: This document does not solicit
applications. In any year in which we
choose to use any of these priorities,
requirements, or definitions, we invite
applications through a notice in the
Federal Register.
Jkt 262001
Under Executive Order 12866, the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) determines whether this
regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and,
therefore, subject to the requirements of
the Executive order and subject to
review by OMB. Section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, as amended by
Executive Order 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 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 set forth in
this 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
Executive Order 14094.
We have also reviewed this final
regulatory action under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and
explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing
regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866, as amended by
Executive Order 14094. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives and
taking into account—among other things
and to the extent practicable—the costs
of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, select those
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than the
behavior or manner of compliance a
regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available
alternatives to direct regulation,
including economic incentives—such as
user fees or marketable permits—to
encourage the desired behavior, or
provide information that enables the
public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires
an agency ‘‘to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated
present and future benefits and costs as
accurately as possible.’’ The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ‘‘identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes.’’
We are issuing these final priorities,
requirements, and definitions only on a
reasoned determination that their
benefits justify their costs. In choosing
among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Based on the analysis that follows, the
Department believes that this regulatory
action is consistent with the principles
in Executive Order 13563.
The potential costs associated with
these priorities, requirements, and
definitions are minimal, while the
potential benefits are significant. The
Department believes that this final
regulatory action will not impose
significant costs on eligible entities.
Participation in this program is
voluntary, and the costs imposed on
applicants by this regulatory action will
be limited to paperwork burden related
to preparing an application. The
potential benefits of implementing the
program will outweigh the costs
incurred by applicants, and the costs of
carrying out activities associated with
the application will be paid for with
program funds. For these reasons, we
have determined that the costs of
implementation will not be burdensome
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 138 / Thursday, July 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
for eligible applicants, including small
entities.
We also have determined that this
regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
In accordance with these Executive
orders, the Department has assessed the
potential costs and benefits, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this
regulatory action. The potential costs
are those resulting from statutory
requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for
administering the Department’s
programs and activities.
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 Federal
financial assistance.
This document provides early
notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that these final
priorities, requirements, and definitions
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The small entities that this final
regulatory action will affect are IHEs
that meet the eligibility requirements
described in section 241(1) of the HEA.
The Secretary believes that the costs
imposed on applicants by the final
priorities, requirements, and definitions
will be limited to paperwork burden
related to preparing an application and
that the benefits will outweigh any costs
incurred by applicants.
Participation in this program is
voluntary. For this reason, the final
priorities, requirements, and definitions
will impose no burden on small entities
unless they applied for funding under
the program. We expect that in
determining whether to apply for RDI
grant program funds, an eligible
applicant would evaluate the
requirements of preparing an
application and any associated costs,
and weigh them against the benefits
likely to be achieved by receiving a
grant. Eligible applicants most likely
would apply only if they determine that
the likely benefits exceed the costs of
preparing an application. The likely
benefits include the potential receipt of
a grant as well as other benefits that may
accrue to an entity through its
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:44 Jul 17, 2024
Jkt 262001
development of an application, such as
the use of that application to seek
funding from other sources to address
the institution’s R&D infrastructure
needs.
This final regulatory action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a small entity once it receives a grant
because it will be able to meet the costs
of compliance using the funds provided
under this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
These final priorities, requirements,
and definitions do not contain any
information collection requirements.
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,
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
Department documents 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 Department
documents 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.
Nasser Paydar,
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary
Education.
[FR Doc. 2024–15537 Filed 7–17–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2024–0034; FRL–11775–
02–R5]
Air Plan Approval; Ohio; OAC Chapter
3745–17 Particulate Matter
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
58291
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving revisions to
Ohio’s particulate matter rules into the
Ohio State Implementation Plan (SIP)
under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The
revisions to Ohio’s particulate matter
rules remove provisions for facilities or
emissions units that have permanently
shut down, update facility names and
addresses, and make nonsubstantive
revisions to the language of the rules.
EPA proposed to approve this action on
April 15, 2024, and received two
comments.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
August 19, 2024.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R05–OAR–2024–0034. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI), Proprietary Business
Information (PBI), or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either through https://
www.regulations.gov or at the
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We
recommend that you telephone Emily
Crispell, Environmental Scientist, at
(312) 353–8512 before visiting the
Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Emily Crispell, Air and Radiation
Division (AR–18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois,
60604, (312) 353–8512, crispell.emily@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
SUMMARY:
I. Background Information
On January 18, 2024, the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency
(Ohio) requested SIP approval of a
variety of amendments to its regulations
in Ohio Administrative Code (OAC)
Chapter 3745–17, entitled ‘‘Particulate
Matter Standards.’’ The amended rules
include administrative revisions such as
the removal of provisions that pertain to
facilities that have permanently shut
down, renumbering of emissions units
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 138 (Thursday, July 18, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58287-58291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-15537]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter VI
[Docket ID ED-2024-OPE-0065]
Research and Development Infrastructure Grant
AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final priorities, requirements, and definitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) issues priorities,
requirements, and definitions for use in the Research and Development
Infrastructure (RDI) grant program. The Department may use one or more
of these priorities, requirements, and definitions for competitions in
fiscal year (FY) 2024 and later years. We intend for these priorities,
requirements, and definitions to help Historically Black Colleges and
Universities (HBCUs), Tribal Controlled Colleges and Universities
(TCCUs), and Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) implement
transformational investments in research infrastructure, including
research productivity, faculty expertise, graduate programs, physical
infrastructure, human capital development, and partnerships leading to
increases in external funding.
DATES: These priorities, requirements, and definitions are effective
August 19, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason Cottrell, Ph.D., U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5C122, Washington, DC 20202-
4260. Telephone: (202) 453-7530. 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:
Purpose of Program: The RDI grant program is designed to provide
HBCUs, TCCUs, and MSIs, including Asian American and Native American
Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs), Alaska Native and
Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions (ANNH), Hispanic Serving
Institutions (HSIs), Native American Serving Non-Tribal Institutions
(NASNTIs), and Predominantly Black Institutions (PBIs), and consortia
led by an eligible institution of higher education, with funds to
implement transformational investments in research infrastructure,
including research productivity, faculty expertise, graduate programs,
physical infrastructure, human capital development, and partnerships
leading to increases in external and sustained funding.
Assistance Listing Number: 84.116H.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d.
We published a notice of proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions in the Federal Register on May 17, 2024 (89 FR 43352)
(NPP). That document contained background information and the
Department's reasons for proposing the particular priorities,
requirements, and definitions. There is one substantive difference
between the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions and
these final priorities, requirements, and definitions.
We have added Priority 5, as described below.
Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the NPP, six
parties submitted comments on the proposed priorities, requirements,
and definitions. Generally, we do not address technical and other minor
changes, or suggested changes that the law does not authorize us to
make under applicable statutory authority. In addition, we do not
address general comments that raised concerns not directly related to
the proposed priorities, requirements, or definitions.
Analysis of Comments and Changes: An analysis of the comments and
of any changes in the priorities, requirements, and definitions since
publication of the NPP follows.
Priorities
Comments: One commenter suggested that we modify Proposed Priority
1 to support schools that demonstrate intention and realistic capacity
to move from any research status under the American Council on
Education's Carnegie Classification System to classification as a
Research College and University (RCU) or a Doctoral University with
High Research Activity (R2), rather than limiting support to RCU and R2
institutions seeking to move up to classification as R2 or Doctoral
University with Very High Research Activity (R1), respectively. The
commenter suggested that, if an applicant can demonstrate a realistic
prospect of movement into R1, it already has a substantial level of
research and development infrastructure and financial capacity.
Discussion: The purpose of the RDI grant program is to support
institutions that have limited resources and diverse student
enrollments--as the eligible entities, HBCUs, TCCUs, and MSIs, do--with
funds to implement transformational investments in research
infrastructure to move into R2 or R1 status. Attaining R2 or R1 status
assists institutions with recruiting top students and faculty, funding
top-of-the-line facilities to conduct research, and producing and
disseminating cutting-edge knowledge. While we recognize that a wide
range of institutions, regardless of Carnegie classification, could
benefit from additional investments in research and development (R&D)
infrastructure, the Department believes that these limited funds have
the greatest potential to transform R&D infrastructure at institutions
if they are targeted to support institutions in making steps towards R2
and R1 status under the Carnegie Classification System. The funding is
designed to help institutions move towards R2 or R1 status, regardless
of how close they are to achieving it.
Changes: None.
Comments: One commenter proposed amending Proposed Priority 4 to
align the Pell Grant recipient threshold from the proposed 50 percent
of undergraduate students to the current Department of Education Office
of Postsecondary Education standards for Title III and Title V grant
programs. The commenter stated that this change would, by aligning
requirements across Department programs, ease administrative burden on
institutions.
Discussion: The 50 percent Pell recipient threshold in Priority 4
is a higher bar than either of the metrics used for eligibility for
titles III and V programs. To be designated as eligible to apply under
the titles III and V programs, institutions must demonstrate high
enrollment of needy students by meeting either of the following two
criteria: (1) at least 50 percent of its degree-seeking students
received financial assistance under the Federal Pell Grant, Federal
Supplemental
[[Page 58288]]
Educational Opportunity Grant (FSEOG), or Federal Work Study (FWS)
programs; or (2) the percentage of its undergraduate degree-seeking
students who were enrolled on at least a half-time basis and received
Federal Pell Grants exceeded the median percentage of undergraduate
degree students who were enrolled on at least a half-time basis and
received Federal Pell Grants at comparable institutions that offer
similar instruction. For purposes of this priority, we believe this
higher standard is appropriate because the explanatory statement
originally authorizing funding for this program, contained within
Division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-
328), specified that these grants are intended to provide
``transformational'' investments to improve institutions' R&D
infrastructure. The Department believes these funds have the highest
potential to transform an institution's R&D infrastructure if they are
targeted to the institutions with the fewest resources that enroll the
highest percentages of needy students. We do not believe that this
metric imposes any burden upon applicants because the Department will
use administrative data to calculate the Pell percentage for applicant
institutions.
Changes: None.
Comments: None.
Discussion: As we stated in the NPP, TCCUs currently have their own
Carnegie classification and are not included in the R1, R2, or RCU
classifications. Accordingly, we proposed Priority 2 for TCCUs, which
uses an alternative measure of their R&D infrastructure. Since
publication of the NPP, the American Council on Education announced
that starting in 2025, TCCUs will be included in the same
classification system as HBCUs, MSIs, and other institutions.\1\
Therefore, we are adding a priority for TCCUs that mirrors the
priorities for HBCUs and MSIs for use following the change to the
Carnegie classifications, while maintaining Priority 2 so that the
grant program can support TCCUs until such change occurs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 2025 Research Designations FAQs--CARNEGIE CLASSIFICATION OF
INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION (acenet.edu).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes: We have added Priority 5 to support projects proposed by
TCCUs to implement high-quality transformative research capacity
initiatives designed to move the institution from R2 to R1, or from RCU
to R2, research activity status.
Requirements
Comments: Three commenters suggested changes to the match and
waiver requirements. Two commenters proposed eliminating the match and
waiver requirements, and another commenter suggested that schools
applying under Priorities 2 or 4 should be exempt automatically from
the match requirement.
Discussion: We believe that a match requirement will help ensure
that there is sufficient institutional investment in the work supported
by the grant to achieve and sustain a transformational impact. We
recognize that some applicants will have fewer resources, which is the
reason we include the exceptions. Rather than creating exceptions for
some types of institutions, we think it is simpler to have a general
matching requirement and allow low-resourced schools to qualify for a
waiver.
Changes: None.
Comments: One commenter suggested that we revise Proposed
Requirement 1, Use of Funds, to include ``humanities'' under allowable
activity 1 and that we further specify that faculty development under
activity 14 must improve or enhance faculty capacity to manage R&D
projects in fields of research for which funds have been awarded under
this program.
Discussion: Under activity 1, grantees may use funds to improve
infrastructure relating to the enumerated fields, as well as ``other
disciplines.'' The humanities would constitute another discipline under
this allowable use of funds, and, accordingly, no change is required.
We designed activity 14 relating to faculty professional development to
allow for broad support, based on the specific needs of the faculty in
the context of the particular project. We do not think that being more
prescriptive would benefit grantees.
Changes: None.
Comments: One commenter recommended not restricting the indirect
cost rate.
Discussion: The indirect cost reimbursement is limited to 8 percent
of a modified total direct cost base. The Department proposed this
limitation in order to maximize the Federal resources that support
direct costs associated with the project.
Changes: None.
Definitions
Comments: One commenter suggested that the definition for Research
Colleges and Universities (RCUs) should include an option to use data
from an institution's annual financial statements instead of data from
the National Science Foundation (NSF) Higher Education Research and
Development (HERD) survey.
Discussion: To ensure that the program is supporting
transformational investments in R&D infrastructure, consistent with the
Explanatory Statement for this program, the Department is using the
Carnegie Classifications for Institutional Research to determine an
institution's current level of research activity. We believe this is
the best measure because of the standardization for doctoral degree
production and the measures of institutional dollars expended by the
institution annually. Because Carnegie classifications are based on
data from the NSF HERD survey, using this measure ensures consistency
in how we assess institutional research activity.
Changes: None.
Final Priorities
The Secretary establishes the following priorities for use in the
RDI grant program.
Priority 1: Funding for Historically Black Colleges and
Universities' Research and Development Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by HBCUs to implement high-quality transformative
research capacity initiatives and designed to move the institution from
R2 to R1, or from RCU to R2, research activity status.
Priority 2: Funding for Tribal Controlled Colleges and
Universities' Research and Development Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by TCCUs to improve their research and
development activities, including infrastructure, faculty development,
and academic programs.
Priority 3: Funding for Minority-Serving Institutions' Research and
Development Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by MSIs to implement high-quality transformative
research capacity initiatives and designed to move the institution from
R2 to R1, or from RCU to R2, research activity status.
Priority 4: MSI Pell Grant Percentage.
Projects proposed by lead applicants with an enrollment of Pell
Grant recipients that accounts for 50 percent or higher of their
undergraduate student enrollment, as measured by the Department using
the most recent data available in the Integrated Postsecondary
Education Data System (IPEDS).
Priority 5: Funding for Tribal Controlled Colleges and
Universities' Research And Development Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by TCCUs to implement high-quality transformative
research capacity initiatives and
[[Page 58289]]
designed to move the institution from R2 to R1, or from RCU to R2,
research activity status.
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Final Requirements
The Secretary establishes the following requirements for use in the
RDI grant program.
Requirement 1--Use of Funds. Grantees must conduct one or more of
the following activities:
(1) Providing for the improvement of infrastructure existing on the
date of the grant award, including deferred maintenance, or the
establishment of new physical infrastructure, including instructional
program spaces, laboratories, and research facilities relating to the
fields of science, technology, engineering, the arts, mathematics,
health, agriculture, education, medicine, law, and other disciplines.
(2) Hiring and retaining faculty, students, research-related staff,
or other personnel, including research personnel skilled in operating,
using, or applying technology, equipment, or devices to conduct or
support research.
(3) Supporting research internships and fellowships for students,
including undergraduate, graduate, and post-doctoral positions, which
may include providing direct student financial assistance and other
supports to such students.
(4) Creating new, or expanding existing, academic positions,
including internships, fellowships, and post-doctoral positions, in
fields of research for which research and development infrastructure
funds have been awarded to the grantee under this program.
(5) Creating and supporting inter- and intra-institutional research
centers (including formal and informal communities of practice) in
fields of research for which research and development infrastructure
funds have been awarded to the grantee under this program, including
hiring staff, purchasing supplies and equipment, and funding travel to
relevant conferences and seminars to support the work of such centers.
(6) Building new institutional support structures and departments
that help faculty learn about, and increase faculty and student access
to, Federal research and development grant funds and non-Federal
academic research grants.
(7) Building data and collaboration infrastructure so that early
findings and research can be securely shared to facilitate peer review
and other appropriate collaboration.
(8) Providing programs of study and courses in fields of research
for which research and development infrastructure funds have been
awarded to the grantee under this program.
(9) Paying operating and administrative expenses for, and
coordinating project partnerships with members of, the consortium on
behalf of which the eligible institution has received a grant under
this program, provided that grantees may not pay for the expenses of
any R1 institutions that are members of the consortia.
(10) Installing or extending the life and usability of basic
systems and components of campus facilities related to research,
including high-speed broadband internet infrastructure sufficient to
support digital and technology-based learning.
(11) Expanding, remodeling, renovating, or altering biomedical and
behavioral research facilities existing on the date of the grant award
that received support under section 404I of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 283k).
(12) Acquiring and installing furniture, fixtures, and
instructional research-related equipment and technology for academic
instruction in campus facilities in fields of research for which
research and development infrastructure funds have been awarded to the
grantee under this program.
(13) Providing increased funding to programs that support research
and development at the eligible institution that are funded by the
National Institutes of Health, including through their Path to
Excellence and Innovation program.
(14) Faculty professional development.
(15) Planning purposes.
Requirement 2--Indirect Cost Rate Information. A grantee's indirect
cost reimbursement is limited to 8 percent of a modified total direct
cost base. For more information regarding indirect costs, or to obtain
a negotiated indirect cost rate, please see www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
Requirement 3--Matching Requirements and Exceptions. Grantees must
provide a 1:1 match, which can include in-kind donations. The Secretary
may waive the matching requirement on a case-by-case basis upon a
showing of any of the following exceptional circumstances:
(i) The difficulty of raising matching funds for a program to serve
an area with high rates of poverty in the lead applicant's geographic
location, defined as a Census tract, a set of contiguous Census tracts,
an American Indian Reservation, Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Area (as
defined by the U.S. Census Bureau), Alaska Native Village Statistical
Area or Alaska Native Regional Corporation Area, Native Hawaiian
Homeland Area, or other Tribal land or county that has a poverty rate
of at least 25 percent as determined every 5 years using American
Community Survey 5-Year data;
(ii) Serving a significant population of students from low-income
backgrounds at the lead applicant location, defined as at least 50
percent (or the eligibility threshold for the appropriate institutional
sector available at https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/idues/eligibility.html#app) of degree-seeking enrolled students receiving
need-based grant aid under Title IV of the HEA;
(iii) Significant economic hardship as demonstrated by low average
educational and general expenditures per full-time equivalent
undergraduate student at the lead applicant institution, in comparison
with the average educational and general expenditures per full-time
equivalent undergraduate student of institutions that offer similar
instruction without need of a waiver, as determined by the Secretary in
accordance with the annual process for designation of eligible Titles
III and V institutions; or
(iv) Information that otherwise demonstrates a commitment to the
long-term sustainability of the applicant's projects, such as evidence
of a consortium relationship with an R1 institution, a State bond,
State matching, planning documents such as
[[Page 58290]]
a campus plan, multi-year faculty hiring plan, support of industry,
Federal grants received, or a demonstration of institutional commitment
that may include commitment from the institution's board.
Requirement 4: Limitation on Grant Awards. The Department will only
make awards to applicants that are not the individual or lead applicant
in a current active grant from the RDI grant program.
Final Definitions
The Secretary establishes the following definitions for use in the
RDI grant program.
Research 1: Very High Research Spending and Doctorate Production
(R1) means that an institution has spent at least $50 million in total
research and development (R&D) in a year, as reported to the National
Science Foundation (NSF) Higher Education Research and Development
(HERD) Survey, and awarded at least 70 research/scholarship doctorates
in a year, as reported to IPEDS.
Research 2: High Research Spending and Doctorate Production (R2)
means that an institution has spent at least $5 million in total R&D in
a year, as reported to the NSF HERD Survey, and awarded at least 20
research/scholarship doctorates in a year, as reported to IPEDS. It
does not include institutions designated R1.
Research Colleges and Universities (RCU) means that an institution
has spent at least $2.5 million in total R&D in a year, as reported to
the NSF HERD Survey. It does not include institutions designated R1 or
R2.
Historically Black College or University means an institution that
meets the eligibility requirements under section 322(2) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA).
Minority-Serving Institution means an institution that is eligible
to receive assistance under sections 317 through 320 of part A of title
III, or under title V of the HEA.
Tribal Controlled Colleges or Universities has the meaning ascribed
it in section 316(b)(3) of the HEA.
Underrepresented students means students enrolled in postsecondary,
career, or technical education who are in one or more of the following
subgroups: (i) A student from a low-income background. (ii) A student
who is American Indian, Alaska Native, Asian American, Black, Hispanic
or Latino, Native Hawaiian, and/or Pacific Islander.
This document does not preclude us from proposing additional
priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject
to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use any of these priorities, requirements, or
definitions, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal
Register.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) determines whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and
subject to review by OMB. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 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 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 set
forth in this 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 Executive Order 14094.
We have also reviewed this final regulatory action under Executive
Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094. To the
extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires that an
agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing these final priorities, requirements, and
definitions only on a reasoned determination that their benefits
justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those approaches that maximize net benefits.
Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes that this
regulatory action is consistent with the principles in Executive Order
13563.
The potential costs associated with these priorities, requirements,
and definitions are minimal, while the potential benefits are
significant. The Department believes that this final regulatory action
will not impose significant costs on eligible entities. Participation
in this program is voluntary, and the costs imposed on applicants by
this regulatory action will be limited to paperwork burden related to
preparing an application. The potential benefits of implementing the
program will outweigh the costs incurred by applicants, and the costs
of carrying out activities associated with the application will be paid
for with program funds. For these reasons, we have determined that the
costs of implementation will not be burdensome
[[Page 58291]]
for eligible applicants, including small entities.
We also have determined that this regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the exercise of
their governmental functions.
In accordance with these Executive orders, the Department has
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
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 Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that these final priorities, requirements,
and definitions will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The small entities that this final regulatory action will affect
are IHEs that meet the eligibility requirements described in section
241(1) of the HEA. The Secretary believes that the costs imposed on
applicants by the final priorities, requirements, and definitions will
be limited to paperwork burden related to preparing an application and
that the benefits will outweigh any costs incurred by applicants.
Participation in this program is voluntary. For this reason, the
final priorities, requirements, and definitions will impose no burden
on small entities unless they applied for funding under the program. We
expect that in determining whether to apply for RDI grant program
funds, an eligible applicant would evaluate the requirements of
preparing an application and any associated costs, and weigh them
against the benefits likely to be achieved by receiving a grant.
Eligible applicants most likely would apply only if they determine that
the likely benefits exceed the costs of preparing an application. The
likely benefits include the potential receipt of a grant as well as
other benefits that may accrue to an entity through its development of
an application, such as the use of that application to seek funding
from other sources to address the institution's R&D infrastructure
needs.
This final regulatory action will not have a significant economic
impact on a small entity once it receives a grant because it will be
able to meet the costs of compliance using the funds provided under
this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
These final priorities, requirements, and definitions do not
contain any information collection requirements.
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, 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 Department documents 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 Department documents 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.
Nasser Paydar,
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2024-15537 Filed 7-17-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P