Quiero saber acerca de...

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 130 / Monday, July 12, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 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 75.105c2i; or 2 selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of comparable merit that does not meet the priority 34 CFR
75.105c2ii.
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 75.105c1.
Final Requirement:
Requirement:
The Department establishes the following requirement for this program.
We may apply this requirement in any year in which this program is in effect.
Eligible Applicants: To be considered for an award under this competition, an applicant must be one or more of the following:
1 An LEA in which 20 percent or more of the students served by the LEA
are from families with an income below the poverty line as defined in section 810141 of the ESEA.
2 A consortium of such LEAs described in paragraph 1 above.
3 The Bureau of Indian Education.
4 An eligible national nonprofit organization as defined in section 2226b2 of the ESEA that serves children and students within the attendance boundaries of one or more eligible LEAs.
Note: Under the definition of poverty line in section 810141 of the ESEA, the determination of the percentage of students served by an LEA from families with an income below the poverty line is based on the U.S. Census Bureaus SAIPE data.
An entity that meets the definition of an LEA in section 810130 of the ESEA
and that serves multiple LEAs, such as a county office of education, an education service agency, or regional service education agency, must provide the most recent SAIPE data for each of the individual LEAs it serves. To determine whether the entity meets the poverty threshold, the Department will derive the entitys poverty rate by aggregating the number of students from families below the poverty line as provided in SAIPE data in each of the LEAs the entity serves and dividing it by the total number of students as provided in SAIPE data in all of the LEAs the entity serves.
An LEA for which SAIPE data are not available, such as a non-geographic charter school, must provide a determination by the State educational
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:15 Jul 09, 2021

Jkt 253001

agency SEA that 20 percent or more of the students aged 517 in the LEA are from families with incomes below the poverty line based on the same Statederived poverty data the SEA used to determine the LEAs allocation under part A of title I of the ESEA.
This document does not preclude us from proposing additional priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year in which we choose to use one or more of these priorities or the requirement, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget OMB must determine whether this regulatory action is significant and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by OMB. Section 3f of Executive Order 12866 defines a significant regulatory action as an action likely to result in a rule that may 1 Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities in a material way also referred to as an economically significant rule;
2 Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
3 Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or 4 Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the Presidents priorities, or the principles stated in the Executive order.
This final regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by OMB under section 3f of Executive Order 12866.
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. 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 00031

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

36513

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 accountamong other things and to the extent practicablethe 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 incentivessuch as user fees or marketable permitsto 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 and this final requirement 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.
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 both Executive orders, the Department has assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as necessary for administering the Departments programs and activities.
Potential Costs and Benefits The Department believes that this regulatory action will not impose significant costs on eligible entities,
E:FRFM12JYR1.SGM

12JYR1