Table Of ContentThursday
January 25, 2007
Part III
Department of
Education
34 CFR Part 76
State-Administered Programs; Final Rule
S3
E
UL
R
with
C64
P
D1
O
R
P
ycherry on VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:43 Jan 24, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\25JAR3.SGM 25JAR3
3698 Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 16/Thursday January 25, 2007/Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION • Under proposed §76.720(c)(1), renaming EDEN and the expanded Web-
States would have to comply with the based interface ‘‘EDFacts.’’ Accordingly,
34 CFR Part 76 Secretary’s requirements concerning the except as otherwise noted, we will
manner in which reports are submitted describe the expanded system using the
RIN 1890–AA13 to the Department. name ‘‘EDFacts’’ in this final
• Under proposed §76.720(c)(2), rulemaking document.
State-Administered Programs failure by a State to submit reports in The Department has now obtained
AGENCY: Department of Education. the manner prescribed by the Secretary approval from OMB to require the
would constitute a failure, under section electronic submission of data through
ACTION: Final regulations. 454 of the General Education Provisions EDFacts. The Department published
SUMMARY: The Secretary amends the Act (20 U.S.C. 1234c), to comply both PRA notices for this data collection
regulations in 34 CFR part 76 governing substantially with a requirement of law under the title ‘‘Annual Mandatory
State reporting requirements. These applicable to the Department’s Collection of Elementary and Secondary
final regulations require States to submit pro•gUranmdse.r proposed §76.720(c)(3), Education Data for the Education Data
their performance reports, financial Exchange Network.’’ Because we have
which applies to reports that the
reports, and any other required reports, changed the name of the Education Data
Secretary requires to be submitted
in the manner prescribed by the Exchange Network to EDFacts, the title
electronically, the Secretary would have
Secretary, including through electronic of the justification for OMB Control No.
the discretion to establish a transition
submission, if the Secretary has 1875–0240 has been changed to
period of up to two years during which
obtained approval from the Office of ‘‘Annual Mandatory Collection of
a State would not be required to submit
Management and Budget (OMB) under Elementary and Secondary Education
information electronically in the format
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Data through EDFacts.’’ We also note
prescribed by the Secretary if the State
(PRA). Failure to submit such reports in that some of the language in the
submits to the Secretary (a) evidence
the manner prescribed by the Secretary Supporting Statement for this collection
satisfactory to the Secretary that the
constitutes a failure, under section 454 has been changed from that which was
State is unable to comply, (b) the
of the General Education Provisions Act, originally posted in the Education
information requested in the report,
20 U.S.C. 1234c, to comply substantially Department Information Collection
through an alternative means deemed
with a requirement of law applicable to System (EDICS). The Department’s goal
acceptable by the Secretary, and (c) a
the funds made available under the in requiring electronic submission of
plan showing how the State would
program for which the reports are information, including data submitted
come into compliance with the data
submitted. If the Secretary chooses to through EDFacts, is to reduce State-
submission requirements specified in
require submission of information reporting burden significantly and to
the data collection instrument.
electronically, the Secretary may There are no differences between the streamline dozens of data collections
establish a transition period during NPRM and these final regulations. currently required by the Department.
which a State would not be required to These regulations highlight that the Analysis of Comments
submit such information electronically Department may require, through the
in the format prescribed by the PRA clearance process, that States In response to the Secretary’s
Secretary, if the State meets certain report certain information electronically invitation in the NPRM, approximately
requirements. and establish that the Department may 21 parties submitted comments on the
DATES: These regulations are effective take administrative action against a proposed regulations and the
February 26, 2007. State for failure to submit reports in the Department’s plan to require States to
manner prescribed by the Secretary. submit data electronically through
FORFURTHERINFORMATIONCONTACT: These regulations will facilitate the use EDFacts beginning with data from the
Patrick Sherrill, U.S. Department of of the Department’s electronic EDFacts 2006–07 school year. To the extent these
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., data management system (EDFacts). comments related to specific elements
room 6C103, Washington, DC 20202. As explained in the NPRM, States of the EDFacts data collection request
Telephone: (202) 708–8196 or via have been submitting data through the (1875–0240) we have addressed those
Internet: [email protected]. Education Data Exchange Network comments as part of the PRA clearance
If you use a telecommunications (EDEN) voluntarily for the past two process for EDFacts, and have not
device for the deaf (TDD), you may call years. EDEN has acted as the included responses to those comments
the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1– Department’s central repository and in this document. For an analysis of
800–877–8339. electronic data collection system for those comments, you may download
Individuals with disabilities may over 140 common data elements on Attachment E ‘‘Paperwork Reduction
obtain this document in an alternative student achievement, school Act Submission Supporting Statement—
format (e.g., Braille, large print, characteristics, demographics, and Annual Mandatory Collection of
audiotape, or computer diskette) on program financial information. The Elementary and Secondary Education
request to the contact person listed Department is now in the process of Data through EDFacts: EDFacts
under FORFURTHERINFORMATION increasing the EDEN capabilities to Response to Public Comments’’ at the
CONTACT. include, in addition to the Web-based following Web site: http://
SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION: On April interface that allows States to submit edicsweb.ed.gov/browse/
27, 2006, the Secretary published a data electronically into EDEN, a downldatt.cfm?pkg_serial_num=3017.
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) capability for States, Department staff, An analysis of the comments relating
in the Federal Register (71 FR 24824). and, eventually, the public, to query the to the proposed regulations follows.
ES3 In the preamble to the NPRM, the database and independently analyze the We group major issues according to
RUL Secretary discussed on pages 24826 to data subject to all applicable privacy subject. Generally, we do not address
with 24828 the major changes proposed to protections for disclosing statistical technical or minor changes, and
C64 the current regulations. These changes data. To signal the increased capabilities suggested changes that we are not
P
D1 are summarized as follows: of the system, the Department is authorized to make under the law.
O
R
P
ycherry on VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:43 Jan 24, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\25JAR3.SGM 25JAR3
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 16/Thursday January 25, 2007/Rules and Regulations 3699
Section 76.720 State Reporting partners, and the public. The whether a State has submitted a
Requirements Nature and Schedule of Department will continue to work with transition plan and whether that plan is
Reports Covered by §76.720 States to provide them with detailed sufficiently detailed to explain how the
feedback that they can use to analyze State would provide the requested data
Comment: A few commenters asked
the quality of the data they submit to the within the transition period.
about the reports covered by these
Department, and to establish mutually To be clear, the Department is not
regulations. Specifically, they asked
agreeable criteria that the Department interested in penalizing States for
what was meant by the phrase ‘‘other
can use to certify the data submitted minor, technical infractions but is
reports by the Secretary’’ in paragraph
through EDFacts. instead focused on collaborating with
(a) of proposed §76.720. One of the
Changes: None. States to strengthen the States’ own data
commenters asked the Department to
systems and the use of data collected
provide a list of these proposed reports Potential Penalties Under §76.720(c)(2)
through those systems to improve
for review. A couple of commenters Comment: One commenter education within their States. Part of the
were concerned about which reports recommended that the Secretary not ability to use data effectively depends
might be required ‘‘more frequently than impose penalties under §76.720(c)(2) on the completeness of those data.
annually’’. One commenter asked the for failure to comply with the reporting Accordingly, the Department will work
Department to provide a ‘‘reporting requirements of the proposed with States to establish reasonable
schedule’’ for review. regulations; others supported the ability criteria for what a complete submission
Discussion: We included the phrase of the Secretary to impose penalties entails.
‘‘other reports by the Secretary’’ in after a reasonable transition period. In addition, the Department plans to
§76.720(a) to establish that the Another commenter recommended that continue to work closely with States as
requirements described in §76.720 enforcement under §76.720(c)(2) partners in the identification, collection,
apply to all State reports that are now, depend on whether a State is making and reporting of complete, accurate,
and may in the future be, required by reasonable, good-faith efforts to comply timely, and valid education information,
the Secretary and have been approved with the requirements. Several other to minimize the need for the
by OMB under the PRA, not just those commenters asked for clarity on how Department to take administrative
reports that are specifically enumerated the penalties would be determined, action to compel compliance with these
in the current regulations. The ability of specifically asking about when a State regulations.
the Secretary to require reporting more would be considered out of compliance, For example, with respect to EDFacts
frequently than annually is not a how penalties would be calculated, and data, the Department currently requests
proposed change; it can be found in whether funds would be withheld from each State to submit an individual State
current §76.720(c). See also 34 CFR administrative or program allocations, data submission plan to address the
80.41(b)(3)(frequency of financial or both. Finally, a commenter asked if unique data submission challenges of
reporting). The schedule for submitting States would be penalized under each State data provider. Working
data to EDFacts is included in the §76.720(c)(2) for failure of local together with States, the Department has
clearance package for that data educational agencies (LEAs) to report provided tools to help States assess their
collection (1875–0240), includes directly to the Office for Civil Rights specific challenges and to develop
proposed annual data submission dates (OCR) in the Department. individualized State data submission
for each of the data groups, and has Discussion: As explained in the plans and reporting schedules for
been provided to the State data preamble to the NPRM, failure of a EDFacts data. The Department also will
coordinators. recipient to comply with the adopt the suggestion of one commenter
Changes: None. Department’s reporting requirements, that the Department conduct site visits
Comment: A number of commenters including submitting reports with individual States to determine
requested clarification on what electronically, harms the Federal their capacity to collect and report data,
constitutes the ‘‘quality level’’ expected interest in establishing what the and to develop phase-in plans and
in the submission of data under Department deems is an efficient and agreements for each. In all cases, the
proposed §76.720(c)(1). effective means of obtaining accurate, Department is committed to providing
Discussion: Section 76.720(c)(1) reliable, and valid information on the the support that is needed to help
provides that States must submit reports performance of the Department’s individual States that are making
at the quality level specified in the data programs and the success of States in reasonable, concerted, good-faith efforts
collection instrument. Accordingly, the meeting their goals under such laws as to comply with the EDFacts data
Department will specify in each data the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 submission requirements.
collection instrument the data quality (Pub. L. 107–110). Thus, we determined Furthermore, the Department
standards that are applicable to the that it was necessary to highlight, anticipates that States will vary in their
reports subject to the data collection through these regulations, the capacity to report data electronically in
instrument. Under the Department’s importance of the Department’s accordance with §76.720. For that
Information Quality Guidelines, the reporting requirements. Moreover, we reason, under §76.720(c)(3), States may
Department seeks to ensure that data it determined that, for the Department’s report data through an alternative means
disseminates to the public are accurate, reporting requirements to be for up to two years following the date
reliable, and useful. Thus, it is meaningful, it was essential for the the States otherwise would be required
important for data submitted to the Secretary to have the appropriate tools to submit the data electronically if they
Department to be complete, timely, to enforce them. That being said, the meet the requirements in paragraphs
accurate, valid, and useful. Department will consider many factors (c)(3)(i) through (c)(3)(iii) of §76.720.
For example, for data that would be in determining whether to impose These requirements include developing
ES3 submitted through EDFacts, the appropriate sanctions, including a plan for coming into compliance with
RUL Department expects to establish data whether a State is making reasonable, the reporting requirements within two
with quality standards in collaboration with good-faith efforts to comply with the years. The Department will work
C64 its State partners, so that the data will reporting requirements and, in the case directly with individual States to
P
D1 be helpful to the Department, its State of mandatory electronic reporting, develop and implement those plans,
O
R
P
ycherry on VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:43 Jan 24, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\25JAR3.SGM 25JAR3
3700 Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 16/Thursday January 25, 2007/Rules and Regulations
and we anticipate they will be data repository and would, therefore, electronically for the 2006–2007 award
customized to address individual State result in the continued practice of year, the State would provide the
capacities. The Department is also open duplicative data collections. Many other Secretary with evidence about which
to the possibility that some of these commenters questioned whether the data groups it could not submit
required data might be submitted by a two-year transition period was a electronically for the 2006–2007 award
State to a multi-State data repository, or sufficient amount of time for States to year and propose a transition plan.
‘‘public utility,’’ maintained by, and for, establish the data systems needed to Under the transition plan, the State
the States, provided that the data supply the reliable and quality data that would submit those data groups that
repository enters into agreements with are being requested for the EDFacts data could be provided electronically to
the participating States and the collection. Commenters suggested EDFACTS for the 2006–2007 school year
Department to ensure that data from the alternatives, ranging from two to five and would provide all other required
repository are provided to EDFacts. years, because of issues such as the need data elements to the Department
Should the Department determine to obtain legislative approval within through an alternative means in
that administrative action is necessary, their States. accordance with §76.720(c)(3)(ii). The
the Department would determine on a Discussion: The Department State would include in its transition
case-by-case basis whether and how appreciates that many States will find it plan information on when, within the
sanctions would be imposed by challenging to make the needed changes two year transition period, it would
considering factors such as the existence to their data systems to be able to report submit the other data elements
of an approved State data submission their data to the Department electronically through EDFACTS. We
plan, the history of the State’s efforts to electronically for any collection of data. are providing as guidance information
provide required data to the The Department recognizes that any about when the Department would
Department, and evidence of a State’s automated information system will expect States to be able to provide data
progress in improving its education data require some significant work to modify electronically through EDFACTS; States
systems. For example, the Department it for the collection, storage, protection, may need to structure their transition
may decide to commence action to and reporting of any data that were plans differently depending on their
withhold administrative funds from a previously uncollected. For this reason, capacities. In all cases, however, we will
State if the Department determines that the Department has determined that it is work cooperatively with States to
the State was not making reasonable and appropriate for the Secretary to have the provide them support in their efforts to
good-faith efforts to implement a discretion to establish a transition comply with the EDFACTS data
transition plan under §76.720(c)(3)(iii) period of up to two years during which collection requests.
to submit reports electronically. a State would not be required to submit Changes: None.
Finally, under 34 CFR 76.500, States information electronically in the format Comment: Most commenters cited
and their subgrantees are responsible for prescribed by the Secretary, if the State scarce State resources as the reason the
compliance with the civil rights statutes meets certain requirements. Because the two-year transition period in §76.720
and regulations enforced by OCR, need for good data is so important, the was inadequate. Several commenters
including the obligation to provide civil Department believes that the two-year stated that to comply with the proposed
rights data when requested by OCR. As transition period is reasonable. regulations they would need to
part of its data collection activities, OCR The two-year transition period applies restructure their current data systems
has been collecting data both from to the EDFacts data collection. Thus, if and, thus, would require more financial
States, and directly from LEAs. The a State is not able to submit all of the and human resources. One commenter
Department cannot specially alter or required data electronically to EDFacts estimated that it would need 4 years and
suspend the civil rights responsibilities by the specified reporting deadline, the $840,000 to comply with the reporting
of States or LEAs during the migration State must submit to the Secretary, in requirements in the EDFACTS data
of the Civil Rights Data Collection accordance with §76.720(c)(3), evidence collection. Many commenters stated that
(CRDC) into EDFacts. During the that the State cannot comply with the States would need more staff to prepare
migration process, when data are electronic submission reporting and report data to EDFACTS. Several
requested from an LEA, the primary requirement, the information requested commenters suggested that the Federal
focus of OCR’s efforts will continue to in the report through an alternative Government provide the funding for
be on the LEA’s obligation to submit the means acceptable to the Secretary, and additional staff to lead the data
required data. Virtually all of the LEAs a plan for submitting the reports in the collection and reporting effort,
participating in the 2006 CRDC have required electronic manner no later than explaining that the work needed at least
notified the Department that they are two years after the reporting deadline. one full-time-equivalent position similar
planning to provide their data We recognize that States may need to the position funded by the National
submissions electronically. However, guidance in developing their plans Center for Education Statistics to
LEAs submitting CRDC data to the under §76.520(c)(3)(iii) with respect to manage data for the National
Department will continue to have the the EDFACTS data collection. To Assessment of Educational Progress.
option of electing other formats, address that need, we included in our One commenter suggested that the
including paper forms. EDFACTS data collection submission to responsibilities of such a position
Changes: None. OMB proposed guidance to States on include submitting and maintaining the
when the Department would expect data submission plan, managing and
Transition Period for Mandatory
States to be able to submit certain data submitting files, reviewing and
Electronic Submission Requirements
elements electronically to EDFACTS. commenting on future changes, and
Under §76.720(c)(3)
The guidance, for example, identifies using EDFACTS for reporting to
Comment: Six commenters expressed those EDFACTS data groups that the management.
ES3 support for the two-year transition Department believes all States should Discussion: Over the last two fiscal
RUL period described in §76.720(c)(3). One have the capability to submit years, the Congress has appropriated
with commenter noted that a longer electronically to EDFACTS for the 2006– nearly $50 million to assist States in
C64 transition period would only serve to 2007 school year. If a State cannot developing State Longitudinal Data
P
D1 delay the presence of a fully populated submit all of those data groups Systems. The Department is continuing
O
R
P
ycherry on VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:43 Jan 24, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\25JAR3.SGM 25JAR3
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 16/Thursday January 25, 2007/Rules and Regulations 3701
to explore ways to increase funding, and eliminate the numerous, redundant messages about which data are required
expand State access to these funds. program collections currently required to be submitted.
Changes: None. of States. One commenter suggested that Discussion: The Department will
Comment: One State recommended the Department ought to provide a continue to use the clearance process
that the two-year transition period be timeframe in which each data collection under the PRA to analyze the national
understood as a minimum period of is to be eliminated. Several others costs and benefits of each data element
time during which States can obtain the suggested that, once data are available to it requires. Proposed data collections
first data set on any new variable. the Department through EDFACTS, the will face a rigorous internal clearance
Another State noted that forcing States Department take swift action to require process at the Department before being
to report data before they have a program offices to cease collecting added to an EDFacts collection—and
complete data set could result in similar data though other means and set then phased in, if necessary. The
inaccurate data being reported. a clear schedule with specific dates for Department asks States to inform it of
Discussion: These regulations address when each data collection is to be any and every Department program
only the submission of data in the form eliminated. If not, one commenter office message that may seem to be ‘‘at
and format required by the Secretary warned, participation in EDFACTS odds’’ with what has been written here,
and not the process by which States might not be worth the effort for States. so that it can improve its
obtain or collect data to be reported to Several commenters noted that there is communication with the public about
the Department. Whether specific data no language in the regulations to make data collection. To help prevent these
are available and the cost of acquiring the use of EDFACTS mandatory for mixed messages, the Department has
or collecting those data are matters that program offices within the Department, convened a cross-program committee
are best addressed in the PRA public and that they are concerned that if this composed of many senior Department
comment and clearance process for each is not explicit within the regulations, program managers to discuss shared
information collection package. That program offices may continue to require data definitions and data usage and to
being noted, the Department’s goal their own reports. ensure internal agency collaboration.
continues to be to obtain accurate, Changes: None.
Discussion: The Department’s goal is
reliable, and useful data from States, in Comment: One commenter asked if it
to eliminate duplicative reporting and,
order to monitor and evaluate the States’ could submit school and district data,
accordingly, the Department is working
performance and use of Department and have the Department aggregate
to ensure that as many of its program
funds. those data to the State level, rather than
offices as possible use EDFacts. In the
Changes: None. submitting all three levels of data.
future, if a program office sends forward
Discussion: EDFacts has the technical
General Comments a proposal to request data through a
capacity to aggregate school data to the
program-specific data collection, and
Comment: Several commenters district level and district data to the
those data are already being collected
expressed concern that they do not State level. The Department has not
through EDFacts, the Secretary will,
currently collect some of the data done this yet because it is concerned
through the internal and PRA clearance
requested through EDFACTS and that, that some data might be missed in the
processes, deny approval for such
therefore, it would be unfair to penalize aggregation process. The Department
duplicate collections. However, if any
them for not having the data or to will work with any State that agrees to
duplicative data elements should slip
require them to establish new data certify that the school-level data that it
through the clearance processes, States
collection efforts. submits through EDFacts is complete in
Discussion: As part of the public can alert the Secretary through the all cells and that the aggregations of
comment period required under the public comment period under the PRA, those cells produce complete data at the
PRA, States have been given the ensuring that redundant data collections district and State levels. The
opportunity to identify any problems are eliminated. Department is willing to make available
they expect to have in supplying the Changes: None. the State data aggregation option and
data required under the EDFACTS data Comment: There were several allow States to submit only school-level
collection (1875–0240). The Department requests by commenters for the data.
has invited comment multiple times on Department to explain the rationale for Changes: None.
exactly which data elements are not certain data elements and for a clear
available from the States. The indication of what data elements are Section 76.722 Subgrantee Reporting
Department has also invited States to going to be eliminated now and in the Requirements
provide this information as part of one future. Some States said that they do not Comment: None.
of the two public comment periods collect or use some of the proposed data Discussion: Current §76.722 provides
under the PRA for the most recent elements and that reporting those data that ‘‘[a] State may require a subgrantee
request for collection of EDFACTS data, will create extra burden. Some to furnish reports that the State needs to
or as part of the ongoing work with the commenters said that States want a carry out its responsibilities under the
States to implement EDFACTS. As comprehensive data map or crosswalk program.’’ In the NPRM, we proposed to
noted elsewhere in this section, every for each and every data element that amend §76.722 slightly in order to
effort will be made in the EDFACTS corresponds to the Federal law that make that provision consistent with the
collection to require only those data that authorizes its collection, the current language in proposed §76.720, which
are needed by the Department in order Department collection forms that collect requires States to submit reports ‘‘in a
to monitor and evaluate a State’s it, and the actual Federal use of the data, manner prescribed by the Secretary.’’
performance in using funds awarded by so that they can see that coordination Thus, proposed §76.722 provides that
the Department. exists between the efforts to collect data ‘‘[a] State may require a subgrantee to
ES3 Changes: None. through EDFacts and the efforts of the submit reports in a manner and format
RUL Comment: A number of commenters Department’s program staff to collect that assists the State * * *.’’ Upon
with expressed concern that the data outside the EDFacts context. One intradepartmental review of the
C64 consolidated, mandatory collection of commenter noted that program staff and language in proposed §76.722, we
P
D1 data through EDFACTS would not EDFacts staff frequently send mixed thought it prudent to clarify that we do
O
R
P
ycherry on VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:43 Jan 24, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\25JAR3.SGM 25JAR3
3702 Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 16/Thursday January 25, 2007/Rules and Regulations
not intend for this language to grant to Summary of Potential Costs and documents published in the Federal
States any authority that they do not Benefits Register, in text or Adobe Portable
already have to collect information from Document Format (PDF) on the Internet
We summarized the potential costs
LEAs to help States carry out their at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/
and benefits of these final regulations in
responsibilities under the Department’s news/fedregister.
the preamble to the NPRM (71 FR
programs. That is, a State may only To use PDF you must have Adobe
24828). We include additional
require its LEAs to submit reports in a Acrobat Reader, which is available free
discussion of potential costs and
particular manner or format if that State at this site. If you have questions about
benefits in the section of this preamble
has the requisite authority to do so using PDF, call the U.S. Government
titled Analysis of Comments.
under its State laws and regulations. In Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1–
implementing proposed §76.722, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 888–293–6498; or in the Washington,
Department expects that each State will The paperwork burden in DC, area at (202) 512–1530.
take into account the capacity of their §76.720(c)(3)(iii) is approved under the
Note: The official version of this document
LEAs to submit reports in the manner PRA as part of the burden in the Annual is the document published in the Federal
and format determined appropriate by Mandatory Collection of Elementary and Register. Free Internet access to the official
the State. Secondary Education Data for EDFacts edition of the Federal Register and the Code
Changes: None. (1875–0240). of Federal Regulations is available on GPO
Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/
Executive Order 12866 Intergovernmental Review
index.html.
We have reviewed these final These regulations affect State- (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
regulations in accordance with administered programs of the Number does not apply.)
Executive Order 12866. Under the terms Department that are subject to Executive
List of Subjects in 34 CFR Part 76
of the order, the Secretary must Order 12372 and the regulations in 34
determine whether this regulatory CFR part 79. The objective of the Elementary and secondary education,
action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore Executive order is to foster an Reporting and recordkeeping
subject to the requirements of the intergovernmental partnership and to requirements.
Executive Order and subject to review strengthen federalism by relying on Dated: January 22, 2007.
by OMB. Section 3(f) of Executive Order processes developed by State and local
Margaret Spellings,
12866 defines a ‘‘significant regulatory governments for coordination and
Secretary of Education.
action’’ as an action likely to result in review of proposed Federal financial
(cid:1) For the reasons discussed in the
a rule that may (1) have an annual effect assistance.
on the economy of $100 million or In accordance with the order, we preamble, the Secretary amends part 76
more, or adversely affect a sector of the intend this document to provide early of title 34 of the Code of Federal
economy, productivity, competition, notification of the Department’s specific Regulations as follows:
jobs, the environment, public health or plans and actions for these programs.
PART 76—STATE-ADMINISTERED
safety, or State, local or tribal
Assessment of Educational Impact PROGRAMS
governments or communities in a
material way (also referred to as an In the NPRM we requested comments (cid:1) 1. The authority citation for part 76 is
on whether the proposed regulations
‘‘economically significant’’ rule); (2) revised to read as follows:
would require transmission of
create serious inconsistency or
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e–3 and 3474,
information that any other agency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken unless otherwise noted.
authority of the United States gathers or
or planned by another agency; (3)
makes available. (cid:1) 2. Section 76.720 is revised to read as
materially alter the budgetary impacts of
Based on the response to the NPRM follows:
entitlement grants, user fees, or loan
and on our review, we have determined
programs or the rights and obligations of
that these final regulations do not §76.720 State reporting requirements.
recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel
require transmission of information that (a) This section applies to a State’s
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
any other agency or authority of the reports required under 34 CFR 80.40
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
United States gathers or makes (Monitoring and reporting of program
the principles set forth in the Executive
available. performance) and 34 CFR 80.41
order. The Department has assessed the
(Financial reporting), and other reports
potential costs and benefits of this Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
required by the Secretary and approved
regulatory action. 1995
by the Office of Management and
The potential costs associated with
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork
the final regulations are those we have
Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531– Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501–
determined to be necessary for
1538) establishes requirements for 3520.
administering the requirements of the
Federal agencies to assess the effects of (b) A State must submit these reports
Department’s State-administered
their regulatory actions on State, local, annually unless—
programs effectively and efficiently. and tribal governments, and on the (1) The Secretary allows less frequent
In assessing the potential costs and private sector. These final regulations reporting; or
benefits—both quantitative and do not impose any Federal mandates on (2) The Secretary requires a State to
qualitative—of these final regulations, any State, local, or tribal governments, report more frequently than annually,
we have determined that the benefits of or the private sector, within the including reporting under 34 CFR 80.12
the regulations justify the costs. meaning of the Unfunded Mandates (Special grant or subgrant conditions for
ES3 We have also determined that this Reform Act of 1995. ‘‘high-risk’’ grantees) or 34 CFR 80.20
RUL regulatory action does not unduly (Standards for financial management
with interfere with State, local, and tribal Electronic Access to This Document systems).
C64 governments in the exercise of their You may view this document, as well (c)(1) A State must submit these
P
D1 governmental functions. as all other Department of Education reports in the manner prescribed by the
O
R
P
ycherry on VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:43 Jan 24, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\25JAR3.SGM 25JAR3
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 16/Thursday January 25, 2007/Rules and Regulations 3703
Secretary, including submitting any of submission requirement, if the State report the data in the electronic manner
these reports electronically and at the submits to the Secretary— prescribed by the Secretary.
quality level specified in the data (i) Evidence satisfactory to the
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e–3, 1231a, and
collection instrument. Secretary that the State will not be able
3474)
(2) Failure by a State to submit reports to comply with the electronic
in accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of submission requirement specified by the (cid:1) 3. Section 76.722 is revised to read as
this section constitutes a failure, under Secretary in the data collection follows:
section 454 of the General Education instrument on the first date the State
Provisions Act, 20 U.S.C. 1234c, to otherwise would be required to report §76.722 Subgrantee reporting
requirements.
comply substantially with a requirement the data electronically;
of law applicable to the funds made (ii) Information requested in the A State may require a subgrantee to
available under that program. report through an alternative means that submit reports in a manner and format
(3) For reports that the Secretary is acceptable to the Secretary, such as that assists the State in complying with
requires to be submitted in an electronic through an alternative electronic means; the requirements under 34 CFR 76.720
manner, the Secretary may establish a and and in carrying out other
transition period of up to two years (iii) A plan for submitting the reports responsibilities under the program.
following the date the State otherwise in the required electronic manner and at
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e–3, 1231a, and
would be required to report the data in the level of quality specified in the data
3474)
the electronic manner, during which collection instrument no later than the
time a State will not be required to date two years after the first date the [FR Doc. E7–1177 Filed 1–24–07; 8:45 am]
comply with that specific electronic State otherwise would be required to BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
S3
E
UL
R
with
C64
P
D1
O
R
P
ycherry on VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:43 Jan 24, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\25JAR3.SGM 25JAR3
