Proposed Requirement — American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ARP ESSER) Fund

Summary

This is a Department of Education notice of a proposed requirement for the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ARP ESSER) Fund, Docket ID ED-2021-OESE-0116. A header says the document has been sent to the Office of the Federal Register but has not yet been scheduled for publication. The notice states that the requirement is intended to promote accountability and transparency and ensure that each State educational agency (SEA) and local educational agency (LEA) meets the statutory requirement to maintain equity. It says the ARP ESSER Fund provides a total of nearly $122 billion to SEAs and LEAs and that the Department is publishing a Request For Information on implementing the maintenance of equity (MOEquity) provisions in section 2004 of the ARP Act.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

The official version of this document is the document
published in the Federal Register. This document has been
sent to the Office of the Federal Register but has not yet
been scheduled for publication.


4000-01-U

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Chapter II

Proposed Requirement--American Rescue Plan Act Elementary

and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund

[Docket ID ED-2021-OESE-0116]

AGENCY:    Office of Elementary and Secondary Education,

Department of Education.

ACTION:    Proposed requirement.

SUMMARY:    The Department of Education (Department) proposes

a requirement for the American Rescue Plan Elementary and

Secondary School Emergency Relief (ARP ESSER) Fund, under

the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP Act).    This

requirement is intended to promote accountability and

transparency and ensure that each State educational agency

(SEA) and each local educational agency (LEA) meets the

statutory requirement to maintain equity.

DATES:    We must receive your comments on or before [INSERT

DATE 30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL

REGISTER].


                                1
ADDRESSES:    Submit your comments through the Federal

eRulemaking Portal or via postal mail, commercial delivery,

or hand delivery.    We will not accept comments submitted by

fax or by email or those submitted after the comment

period.    To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies,

please submit your comments only once.     In addition, please

include the Docket ID at the top of your comments.

     •    Federal eRulemaking Portal:   Go to

www.regulations.gov to submit your comments electronically.

Information on using Regulations.gov, including

instructions for accessing agency documents, submitting

comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site

under “FAQ.”

     •    Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery:

If you mail or deliver your comments about the proposed

requirement, address them to U.S. Department of Education,

400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Room 3W113, Washington, DC 20202.

Privacy Note:    The Department’s policy is to make all

comments received from members of the public available for

public viewing in their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking

Portal at www.regulations.gov.     Therefore, commenters

should be careful to include in their comments only

information that they wish to make publicly available.

                               2
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:       Britt Jung, U.S.

Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Room

3W113, Washington, DC 20202.       Telephone: (202) 453-

5563.    Email:   ESSERF@ed.gov.

     If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay

Service (FRS), toll-free, at 1-800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Invitation to Comment:     We invite you to submit comments

regarding the proposed requirement.       To ensure that your

comments have maximum effect in developing the requirement,

we urge you to clearly identify the specific section of the

proposed requirement that each comment addresses.

        We invite you to assist us in complying with the

specific requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

and their overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden

that might result from the proposed requirement.       In

addition to your general comments and recommended

clarifications, we seek input on (i) what demographic

information (e.g., poverty status, race/ethnicity, students

with disabilities, and English learners) LEAs should

publicly post on the schools the LEA identifies as high-

poverty schools as noted in proposed requirement (a)(2) and


                                   3
(ii) on any further ways we could reduce potential costs or

increase potential benefits while preserving the effective

and efficient administration of our programs.

     During and after the comment period, you may inspect

all public comments about the proposed requirement by

accessing Regulations.gov.   Due to the novel coronavirus

2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the Department buildings are

currently not open to the public.   However, upon reopening

you may also inspect the comments in person in room 3C124,

400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC, between the hours

of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through

Friday of each week except Federal holidays.

     At the same time the Department is publishing this

Notice of Proposed Requirement, it is publishing a Request

For Information (RFI) to help inform its support for SEAs

and LEAs in implementing the MOEquity provisions. Through

the RFI, the Department is seeking input from the public

with respect to specific questions as well as additional

information and perspectives on MOEquity implementation.

Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing

the Rulemaking Record:   On request we will provide an

appropriate accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual

with a disability who needs assistance to review the


                              4
comments or other documents in the public rulemaking record

for the proposed requirement.       If you want to schedule an

appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary

aid, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

Purpose of Program:    The ARP ESSER Fund provides a total of

nearly $122 billion to SEAs and LEAs to help them safely

reopen and sustain the safe operation of schools and

address the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the

Nation’s students by addressing students’ academic, social,

emotional, and mental health needs.       As a condition of

receiving the funds, each SEA and LEA must comply with

multiple requirements, including the maintenance of equity

(MOEquity) requirements in section 2004 of the ARP Act.

Program Authority:    ARP Act of 2021, Public Law 117-2,

March 11, 2021.

PROPOSED REQUIREMENT:    This document contains one proposed

requirement.

Background:

     The ARP Act provides a total of nearly $122 billion

via the ARP ESSER Fund to SEAs and LEAs to help schools

return safely to in-person instruction; sustain the safe

operation of schools; and address the academic, social,


                                5
emotional, and mental health impacts of the COVID-19

pandemic on the Nation’s students.         Section 2004 of the ARP

Act includes new MOEquity provisions that are a condition

for an SEA and LEA to receive funds under the ARP ESSER

Fund.   Under section 2004(b) of the ARP Act, the MOEquity

provisions ensure that LEAs and schools serving a large

share of students from low-income backgrounds do not

experience a disproportionate share of reduced funding in

fiscal years (FYs) 2022 and 2023, and that, for the

highest-poverty LEAs, State funding is not decreased below

their FY 2019 level.      In addition, the MOEquity provisions

ensure that each LEA safeguards its high-poverty schools

from disproportionate cuts to funding and staffing.            On

August 6, 2021, the Department issued a Dear Colleague

Letter (DCL) to Chief State School Officers and District

School Superintendents emphasizing the importance of

maintaining equity and addressing specific implementation

challenges for fiscal year 2022.         On August 6, the

Department also issued updated Frequently Asked Questions

on the Maintenance of Equity Requirements (MOEquity FAQs) 1

providing detailed guidance on how each SEA and LEA can


1 See https://oese.ed.gov/files/2021/08/Maintenance-of-Equity-updated-
FAQs_final_08.06.2021.pdf .


                                   6
maintain equity and comply with the MOEquity provisions.

In that guidance, the Department indicated that SEAs and

LEAs should consider making MOEquity data publicly

available.

     In Appendix A to the MOEquity frequently asked

questions issued in June 2021 and updated on August 6,

2021, the Department asked each SEA to report to it

baseline and initial data on the State’s high-need and

highest-poverty LEAs, the statewide per-pupil amount of

State funds provided to all LEAs in FYs 2021 and 2022 as

well as the per-pupil amount provided to each high-need LEA

in those years, the per-pupil amount of State funds

provided to each highest-poverty LEA in FYs 2019 and 2022,

and a list of the highest-poverty LEAs for which the State

must maintain equity.   The Department is posting these data

on its website at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/american-

rescue-plan/american-rescue-plan-elementary-and-secondary-

school-emergency-relief/maintenance-of-equity/ and will

update the data as new data become available.   These data

are available to interested stakeholders and the public.

The Department also intends to collect SEA-level MOEquity

data through each State’s annual performance report and

will make those data publicly available.


                              7
     Although data on State-level MOEquity will be

available on the Department’s website, there are not

publicly available data for LEA-level MOEquity.

Accordingly, in the proposed requirement, the Department

addresses this need to emphasize the importance of

transparency and accountability in ways that are consistent

with the Department’s policy goals of ensuring that schools

and LEAs serving large proportions of historically

underserved groups of students--including students from

low-income families, students of color, English learners,

students with disabilities, migratory students, and

students experiencing homelessness--receive an equitable

share of State and local funds as the Nation continues to

recover from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our

education system.   To support these goals, and to ensure

public accountability for the implementation of the

MOEquity provisions of the ARP Act, the Department proposes

to require that each SEA make publicly available

information on how each LEA in the State is maintaining

fiscal and staffing equity.   Requiring that MOEquity data

be publicly available will allow parents, families, and

local communities to access information on how the LEA is

maintaining equity for schools with high concentrations of


                              8
students from low-income families.   Additionally, public

posting of data and information on how each LEA in the

State is maintaining equity is an important accountability

tool for SEAs and the Department.

     Several questions in the MOEquity FAQs on LEA-level

maintenance of equity (see generally Questions 22-32)

address the data an SEA would report under this proposed

requirement.   For example, Question 32 discusses LEAs that

may be excepted under paragraph (a)(1) below from meeting

the MOEquity requirements, including those LEAs that

qualify as having exceptional or uncontrollable

circumstances in FY 2022 due to the pandemic.   (See also

the August 6, 2021, DCL.)   Similarly, Questions 23-25

clarify how to identify high-poverty schools under

paragraph (a)(2)(i).   Question 26 provides information

applicable to paragraphs (a)(2)(ii) and (iii) on how the

amount of per-pupil funding aligns with reporting on per-

pupil expenditures under section 1111(h)(1)(C)(x) of the

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.   Questions

28 and 29 clarify how to determine full-time-equivalent

(FTE) staff applicable to paragraphs (a)(2)(iv) and (v).

Finally, Questions 27 and 30 address how to determine if an




                              9
LEA has maintained equity in its high-poverty schools for

paragraph (a)(2)(vi).

Proposed Requirement:

     (a)     By December 31 of each applicable school year, an

SEA must publish the following MOEquity data on its

website, in a way that is machine-readable and

accessible,for each LEA in the State, listed by the

applicable National Center for Education Statistics LEA and

school ID, in a location accessible for parents and

families:

     (1)     Whether the LEA is exempt from MOEquity

requirements under section 2004(c)(2) of the ARP Act,

including but not limited to an LEA that demonstrates an

exceptional or uncontrollable circumstance.

     (2)     If an LEA is not exempt from MOEquity

requirements as detailed in paragraph (a)(1)--         (i)

Which schools in the LEA are identified as high-poverty

schools as defined in section 2004(d)(4) of the ARP Act and

demographic information for each such school compared to

the entire LEA.        (ii)   The per-pupil amount of funding

for each high-poverty school in the LEA in FYs 2021, 2022,

and 2023, as applicable for the year in which the data are

published.


                                 10
     (iii)     The per-pupil amount of funding in the

aggregate for all schools in the LEA in FYs 2021, 2022, and

2023, as applicable for the year in which the data are

published.

     (iv)     The per-pupil number of FTE staff for each high-

poverty school in the LEA in FYs 2021, 2022, and 2023, as

applicable for the year in which the data are published,

which may also be indicated as the number of students per

FTE staff.

     (v)     The per-pupil number of FTE staff in the

aggregate for all schools in the LEA in FYs 2021, 2022, and

2023, as applicable for the year in which the data are

published, which may also be indicated as the number of

students per FTEs.    (vi)   Whether the LEA did not maintain

equity for any high-poverty school in FY 2022 or 2023, as

applicable for the year in which the data are published.

     (b)     If an LEA maintains equity by grade span, the SEA

must post the LEA’s data described in paragraphs (a)(2)(i)-

(vi) by grade span.

     (c)     When reporting on each data element in paragraph

(a), the SEA must ensure that the data reported are

accurate and consistent with the requirements in section

2004(c) of the ARP.


                                11
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

Regulatory Impact Analysis

     Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) must determine whether this regulatory

action is “significant” and, therefore, subject to the

requirements of the Executive order and subject to review

by OMB.    Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a

“significant regulatory action” as an action likely to

result in a rule that may--

     (1)   Have an annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more, or adversely affect a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment,

public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal

governments or communities in a material way (also referred

to as an “economically significant” rule);

     (2)   Create serious inconsistency or otherwise

interfere with an action taken or planned by another

agency;

     (3)   Materially alter the budgetary impacts of

entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the

rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

     (4)   Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of

legal mandates, the President’s priorities, or the


                               12
principles stated in the Executive Order.

     This proposed regulatory action is not a significant

regulatory action subject to review by OMB under section

3(f) of Executive Order 12866.

     We have also reviewed this proposed 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 on 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);


                              13
     (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 the proposed requirement only on a

reasoned determination that its benefits would justify its

costs.   In choosing among alternative regulatory

approaches, we selected the approach that would maximize

net benefits.   Based on an analysis of anticipated costs

and benefits, we believe that the proposed requirement is

consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.


                              14
     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 the 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.

Potential Costs and Benefits

     The Department has analyzed the costs and benefits of

complying with the proposed requirement.   Due to the

varying capacity and administrative structures of affected

entities, we cannot estimate, with absolute precision, the

likely effects of the proposed requirement.   However, as

discussed below, we estimate that the proposed requirement

would have a net cost of . $60,000 over two years.

     For the purposes of these estimates, the Department

assumes that, as part of their routine compliance efforts

and effective administration of the affected Federal

grants, States already collect and retain the relevant


                               15
MOEquity data on each LEA’s implementation of the MOEquity

requirements and that such data are stored in a single

repository (e.g., a single data file including information

for all of the State’s LEAs).        We further assume that

States regularly collect and retain demographic data on

schools within the State.       To the extent that these

assumptions are incorrect, actual costs borne by States

could be higher than those outlined below.

        We assume that a representative from each of the 50

States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico

(hereafter referred to as States) would review the final

requirement.     We assume that such review would take, on

average, one hour per State for a one-time cost of

approximately $2,800. 2

        We assume that, for each State, a management analyst

would need to spend approximately eight hours, on average,

compiling the relevant data and preparing it for posting.

Within this estimate, we assume a management analyst would

compile and incorporate demographic data into the same file

as the MOEquity data, employ any necessary data suppression


2 TheDepartment assumes a loaded wage rate of $53.79 per hour based on
the average hourly wage rate for management analysts employed in State
governments, excluding schools and hospitals
(https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_999200.htm), which is
multiplied by 1.61 to account for the employer cost for employee
compensation (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf).
                                  16
rules, and make any necessary formatting changes for

posting of the data.      We assume that posting the data

online would take a network administrator ($59.09 3 per hour)

approximately 30 minutes.       In total, we assume posting data

would cost approximately $32,300 per year.

      Finally, we assume that approximately 20 States would

need to update their data after initial posting.            We assume

the updates would take a management analyst approximately 4

hours to complete and would require 30 minutes for a

network administrator to post.         In total, we assume posting

corrections would cost approximately $6,500 per year.

      As noted above, approximately 20 States would need to

post their data twice.      As such, we estimate that the

proposed requirement would cost a total of approximately

$60,000 over two years.

      In general, we believe that the costs outlined above

could be offset with funds the States have reserved under

the ARP ESSER grant program.        The benefit of publicly

posting this local MOEQuity data is to facilitate public

accountability so that parents and families will be able to



3 The Department assumes a loaded wage rate of $59.09 per hour based on
the average hourly wage rate for network and computer systems
administrators employed in State governments, excluding schools and
hospitals (https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_999200.htm), which is
multiplied by two to account for overhead and benefits.
                                  17
access publicly available information on how each LEA in

the State is maintaining fiscal and staffing equity.       As

such, we believe the benefit to the general public would

far outweigh any burden on States.

Clarity of the Regulations

      Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum

“Plain Language in Government Writing” require each agency

to write regulations that are easy to understand.

      The Secretary invites comments on how to make the

proposed requirement easier to understand, including

answers to questions such as the following:

      •   Are the requirements in the proposed regulations

clearly stated?

      •   Do the proposed regulations contain technical terms

or other wording that interferes with their clarity?

      •   Would the proposed regulations be difficult to

understand for or to explain to someone with literacy

challenges or limited English proficiency?

•   Does the format of the proposed regulations (grouping and

order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid

or reduce their clarity?

      •   Would the proposed regulations be easier to

understand if we divided them into more (but shorter)
                               18
sections?

      •   Could the description of the proposed regulations in

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble be

more helpful in making the proposed regulations easier to

understand?    If so, how?

      •   What else could we do to make the proposed

regulations easier to understand?

      To send any comments that concern how the Department

could make the proposed requirement easier to understand,

see the instructions in the ADDRESSES section.

Intergovernmental Review:    These programs are subject to

Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part

79.   One of the objectives of the Executive order is to

foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened

federalism.    The Executive order relies on processes

developed by State and local governments for coordination

and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.

      This document provides early notification of our

specific plans and actions for these programs.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

      The Secretary certifies that this proposed regulatory

action would not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.    The U.S. Small

                               19
Business Administration Size Standards define proprietary

institutions as small businesses if they are independently

owned and operated, are not dominant in their field of

operation, and have total annual revenue below $7,000,000.

Nonprofit institutions are defined as small entities if

they are independently owned and operated and not dominant

in their field of operation.   Public institutions are

defined as small organizations if they are operated by a

government overseeing a population below 50,000.

     The proposed regulatory action would affect only

States, none of which is a small entity for the purpose of

this analysis.

Paperwork Reduction Act

     As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork

and respondent burden, the Department provides the general

public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment

on proposed and continuing collections of information in

accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).   This helps ensure that the

public understands the Department’s collection

instructions, respondents provide the requested data in the

desired format, reporting burden (time and financial

resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly


                               20
understood, and the Department can properly assess the

impact of collection requirements on respondents.

     The proposed requirement that an SEA must publish on

its website MOEquity data for each LEA in the State

contains an information collection requirement.   Under the

PRA, the Department has submitted this requirement to OMB

for its review.

     A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor a

collection of information unless OMB approves the

collection under the PRA and the corresponding information

collection instrument displays a currently valid OMB

control number.   Notwithstanding any other provision of the

law, no person is required to comply with, or is subject to

penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of

information if the collection instrument does not display a

currently valid OMB control number.

     As discussed in the Potential Costs and Benefits

section of the Regulatory Impact Analysis, this proposed

requirement would create cost and burden hours for SEAs.

In the following paragraphs, we estimate the cost and

burden hours associated with complying with this proposed

requirement.   Differences between the estimates in the

Regulatory Impact Analysis and this section are due to


                              21
differences in calculating the net impact and annual impact

of this requirement.

     We assume that, for each SEA, including the District

of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, a

management analyst, at an hourly rate of $53.79, will spend

approximately 8 hours compiling the relevant data and

preparing it for publication on the SEA website.     At an

hourly rate of $59.09, we estimate that posting the data

online would take a network administrator approximately 30

minutes.   We estimate that posting the MOEquity data would

cost each SEA $460 and result in 8.5 burden hours annually

for a total annual cost of $23,900, and 442 burden hours.

     We estimate that approximately 20 States will need to

update their data after initial posting.     We assume the

updates would take a management analyst approximately 4

hours to complete and would require 30 minutes for a

network administrator to post.     We estimate posting

corrections will cost each SEA $240 and result in 4.5

burden hours for a total cost of $4,900, and 90 burden

hours.

     Collectively, we estimate that this proposed

requirement would result in a total estimated cost of

$23,800 and a total estimated burden of 532 hours to the


                              22
public annually.

        The Department is requesting paperwork clearance on

the OMB 1810-0759 data collection associated with this

proposed requirement.    That request will account for all

burden hours and costs discussed within this section.

Consistent with 5 CFR 1320.8(d), the Department is

soliciting comments on the information collection through

this document.    We must receive your comments on the

collection activities contained in this proposed

requirement on or before [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE

OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].    Comments related

to the information collection activities must be submitted

electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at

www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number ED-

2021-OESE-0116 or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or

hand delivery by referencing the Docket ID number and the

title of the information collection request at the top of

your comment.    Comments submitted by postal mail or

delivery should be addressed to the PRA Coordinator of the

Strategic Collections and Clearance Governance and Strategy

Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave.,

SW, Room 6W208D, Washington, DC 20202–8240.

Note:    The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs and


                                23
the Department review all comments related to the

information collection activities posted at

www.regulations.gov.

Collection of Information

                                   Total
Information     Estimated Hours    Estimated
Collection      Number    Per      Burden    Estimated
Activity        Responses Response Hours     Total Cost
MOEquity Data
Posting              52        8.5       442       $32,300
MOEquity Data
Updates              20        4.5       90        $6,500
Annualized
Total                72                  532       $38,800


Accessible Format:    On request to the program contact

person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,

individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in

an accessible format.     The Department will provide the

requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich

Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an

MP3 file, braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc,

or other accessible format.

Electronic Access to This Document:     The official version

of this document is the document published in the Federal

Register.   You may access the official edition of the

Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations at

www.govinfo.gov.   At this site you can view this document,

                                24
as well as all other documents of the Department published

in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document

Format (PDF).   To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat

Reader, which is available free at the site.

     You may also access documents of the Department

published in the Federal Register by using the article

search feature at www.federalregister.gov.   Specifically,

through the advanced search feature at this site, you can

limit your search to documents published by the Department.

Dated:




                     _________________________
                     Ian Rosenblum,
                     Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy
                     and Programs Delegated the authority to
                     perform the functions and duties of the
                     Assistant Secretary for Elementary and
                     Secondary Education.




                              25


File and source

File

department-of-education-notice-of-proposed-requirements-npr-www-ed-gov-9c9efa39b1.pdf

Size

161,691 bytes

SHA-256

81724e1261ce8fce761d275ca340f7735ac80993e3162516a45ad3802bcd7d00

Our copy

department-of-education-notice-of-proposed-requirements-npr-www-ed-gov-9c9efa39b1.pdf

Original

www.ed.gov