24690 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2012 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Notice of Proposed Information 

Collection Requests; Federal Student 

Aid; Pell Grant, ACG, and National 

SMART Reporting Under the Common 

Origination and Disbursement (COD) 

System 

SUMMARY: The Federal Pell Grant, ACG, 

and National SMART Programs are 

student financial assistance programs 

authorized under the Higher Education 

Act of 1965 (HEA), as amended. These 

programs provide grant assistance to an 

eligible student attending an institution 

of higher education. The institution 

determines the student’s award and 

disburses program funds to the student 

on behalf of the Department (ED). To 

account for the funds disbursed, 

institutions report student payment 

information to ED electronically. COD is 

a simplified process for requesting, 

reporting, and reconciling Pell Grant, 

ACG, and National SMART funds. 

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before June 25, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments 

regarding burden and/or the collection 

activity requirements should be 

electronically mailed to 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or mailed to U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 

20202–4537. Copies of the proposed 

information collection request may be 

accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, 

by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending 

Collections’’ link and by clicking on 

link number 04843. When you access 

the information collection, click on 

‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view. 

Written requests for information should 

be addressed to U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537. 

Requests may also be electronically 

mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed 

to 202–401–0920. Please specify the 

complete title of the information 

collection and OMB Control Number 

when making your request. 

Individuals who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires 

that Federal agencies provide interested 

parties an early opportunity to comment 

on information collection requests. The 

Director, Information Collection 

Clearance Division, Privacy, Information 

and Records Management Services, 

Office of Management, publishes this 

notice containing proposed information 

collection requests at the beginning of 

the Departmental review of the 

information collection. The Department 

of Education is especially interested in 

public comment addressing the 

following issues: (1) Is this collection 

necessary to the proper functions of the 

Department; (2) will this information be 

processed and used in a timely manner; 

(3) is the estimate of burden accurate; 

(4) how might the Department enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (5) how 

might the Department minimize the 

burden of this collection on the 

respondents, including through the use 

of information technology. Please note 

that written comments received in 

response to this notice will be 

considered public records. 

Title of Collection: Pell Grant, ACG, 

and National SMART Reporting under 

the Common Origination and 

Disbursement (COD) System. 

OMB Control Number: 1845–0039. 

Type of Review: Extension. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Responses: 6,019,900. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Burden Hours: 507,362. 

Abstract: The Federal Pell Grant, 

ACG, and National SMART Programs 

are student financial assistance 

programs authorized under the Higher 

Education Act of 1965 (HEA), as 

amended. These programs provide grant 

assistance to an eligible student 

attending an institution of higher 

education. The institution determines 

the student’s award and disburses 

program funds to the student on behalf 

of the Department (ED). To account for 

the funds disbursed, institutions report 

student payment information to ED 

electronically. COD is a simplified 

process for requesting, reporting, and 

reconciling Pell Grant, ACG, and 

National SMART funds. 

Dated: April 19, 2012. 

Darrin A. King, 

Director, Information Collection Clearance 

Division, Privacy, Information and Records 

Management Services, Office of Management. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9993 Filed 4–24–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Exemplary Charter School 

Collaboration Awards; Proposed 

Definitions, Requirements, and 

Selection Criteria; Catalog of Federal 

Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number 

84.282P 

AGENCY: Office of Innovation and 

Improvement, Department of Education. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Deputy 

Secretary for Innovation and 

Improvement proposes definitions, 

requirements, and selection criteria for 

the Exemplary Charter School 

Collaboration Awards (Collaboration 

Awards) and may use these definitions, 

requirements, and selection criteria for 

a competition in fiscal year (FY) 2012 

and later years. The Assistant Deputy 

Secretary is taking this action to create 

incentives for charter schools (as 

defined in section 5210(1) of the 

Elementary and Secondary Education 

Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA)) to (a) 

collaborate with non-chartered public 

schools (as defined in this notice) and 

non-chartered local educational 

agencies (LEAs) to share and transfer 

best educational and operational 

practices at the elementary and 

secondary school levels; and (b) 

disseminate information about these 

collaborations across the Nation. 

The Collaboration Awards 

competition would be designed to 

encourage charter schools and nonchartered public schools or nonchartered LEAs to share resources and 

responsibilities, build trust and 

teamwork, boost academic excellence in 

charter schools and non-chartered 

public schools alike, and provide 

students and their parents with a range 

of effective educational options. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before May 25, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments about 

this notice to Erin Pfeltz, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW., Room 4W255, 

Washington, DC 20202–5970; or to 

Nancy Paulu, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 4W246, Washington, DC 20202– 

5970. 

If you prefer to send your comments 

by email, use the following addresses: 

erin.pfeltz@ed.gov or 

nancy.paulu@ed.gov. You must include 

the phrase ‘‘Exemplary Charter School 

Collaboration Awards—Comments on 

Proposed Definitions, Requirements, 

and Selection Criteria’’ in the subject 

line of your electronic message. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2012 / Notices 24691 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin 

Pfeltz at (202) 205–3525 or by email at 

erin.pfeltz@ed.gov or Nancy Paulu at 

(202) 205–5392 or by email at 

nancy.paulu@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 

telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay 

Service, toll free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding this 

notice. To ensure that your comments 

have maximum effect in developing the 

notice of final definitions, requirements, 

and selection criteria, we urge you to 

identify clearly the specific proposed 

definition, requirement, or selection 

criterion 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 these proposed 

definitions, requirements, and selection 

criteria. Please let us know of ways we 

could reduce potential costs or increase 

potential benefits while preserving the 

effective and efficient administration of 

the Department’s programs and 

activities. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about this notice in room 4W255, 400 

Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, 

DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. 

Washington, DC time, Monday through 

Friday of each week except Federal 

holidays. 

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 

comments or other documents in the 

public rulemaking record for this notice. 

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 purpose of the Charter Schools 

Program (CSP) is to increase national 

understanding of the charter school 

model by—- 

(1) Providing financial assistance for 

the planning, program design, and 

initial implementation of charter 

schools; 

(2) Evaluating the effects of charter 

schools, including the effects on 

students, student academic 

achievement, staff, and parents; 

(3) Expanding the number of highquality charter schools available to 

students across the Nation; and 

(4) Encouraging the States to provide 

support to charter schools for facilities 

financing in an amount more nearly 

commensurate to the amount the States 

have typically provided for traditional 

public schools. 

Background: 

Over the past 20 years, the charter 

school movement has grown in size and 

significance. The first charter school 

opened in Minnesota in 1992; today 

more than 5,000 charter schools are 

spread across the Nation. As charter 

schools have increased in number and 

popularity, so too has the tension 

between charter schools and traditional 

public schools and LEAs, as they 

compete for students. We believe that 

encouraging and facilitating 

collaboration between charter schools 

and non-chartered public schools and 

non-chartered LEAs can help change 

this dynamic. 

By encouraging charter schools, other 

public schools, and LEAs to work 

together as partners, the Department, 

through the Collaboration Awards 

competition, aims to increase national 

understanding of the charter school 

model. By creating partnerships and 

carrying out dissemination activities, 

non-chartered public schools and nonchartered LEAs would get first-hand 

experience with the charter school 

model—freedom from some of the strict 

rules, regulations, and statutes that 

inhibit the flexible operation of 

traditional public schools and LEAs in 

exchange for increased accountability 

for producing certain results, as set forth 

in each school’s charter. The 

Collaboration Awards competition 

would further support recent Federal 

initiatives that encourage Federal 

agencies to provide awards as incentives 

to stimulate innovation and promote 

agencies’ core missions. 

Authorized Activities: 

The Collaboration Awards 

competition would be conducted as a 

part of the CSP’s national activities. 

Under section 5205(a) of the ESEA, the 

Secretary reserves CSP funds to carry 

out a number of national activities, 

which may include, among other things, 

(a) providing information, training, and 

assistance to charter schools; (b) 

disseminating best or promising 

practices in charter schools to other 

public schools; (c) conducting 

evaluations or studies of the impact of 

charter schools on student achievement; 

and (d) providing other types of support 

and technical assistance to charter 

schools and other applicants for 

assistance under the CSP. The required 

activities that we are proposing for 

Collaboration Awards are within the 

scope of these authorized activities. 

Collaboration Award grantees would 

collaborate, and disseminate 

information about the collaborations, in 

a broad range of areas within the scope 

of activities authorized under section 

5205(a) of the ESEA. Awards would be 

based on the quality of existing or past 

collaboration activities as well as 

proposals in the grant applications for 

future collaboration activities, which 

could involve continuing, modifying, or 

expanding the existing or past model or 

models of collaboration. In making 

awards, the Secretary also would 

consider the quality of proposals to 

disseminate information or best 

practices regarding the collaboration 

activities upon which the award is 

based. 

Program Authority: 

The CSP is authorized under 20 

U.S.C. 7221–7221i. CSP national 

activities are authorized under 20 U.S.C. 

7221d. 

Proposed Definitions 

In addition to the definitions in 

section 5210 of the ESEA, which 

include the definition of charter school, 

we are proposing the following 

definitions for the Collaboration Awards 

competition. We may apply one or more 

of these definitions in any year in which 

we make awards under a Collaboration 

Awards competition. 

Collaboration refers to the activities of 

a partnership in which two or more 

organizations or entities work together 

to accomplish a common goal, which 

may involve sharing or transferring best 

practices or strategies. 

Non-chartered local educational 

agency (LEA) refers to an LEA that does 

not qualify as a charter school as 

defined in section 5210(1) of the ESEA 

or under State law. 

Non-chartered public school refers to 

a public school that does not qualify as 

a charter school under section 5210(1) 

of the ESEA or under State law. 

Significant compliance issue means a 

violation that did, will, or could lead to 

the revocation of a school’s charter. 

Student achievement means— 

(a) For tested grades and subjects: (1) 

A student’s score on the State’s 

assessments under the ESEA; and, as 

appropriate (2) other measures of 

student learning, such as those 

described in paragraph (b) of this 

definition, provided they are rigorous 

and comparable across schools. 

(b) For non-tested grades and subjects: 

Alternative measures of student learning 

and performance, such as student scores 

on pre-tests and end-of-course tests; 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
24692 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2012 / Notices 

student performance on English 

language proficiency assessments; and 

other measures of student achievement 

that are rigorous and comparable across 

schools. 

Proposed Competition Requirements 

Background 

The Department proposes to use the 

Collaboration Awards competition to 

encourage collaboration between charter 

schools and non-chartered public 

schools and non-chartered LEAs, as well 

as to disseminate information and share 

or transfer best practices to improve 

educational and operational practices in 

public schools, including public charter 

schools. The Assistant Deputy Secretary 

for Innovation and Improvement 

proposes the following requirements to 

support these goals. The Department 

may apply one or more of these 

requirements in any year in which this 

competition is in effect. 

Proposed Eligibility Requirements 

1. Eligible applicants are charter 

schools (as defined in section 5210(1) of 

the ESEA). In order to be eligible to 

receive an award under a Collaboration 

Awards competition, a charter school 

must apply in partnership with at least 

one non-chartered public school (as 

defined in this notice) or non-chartered 

LEA (as defined in this notice) and have 

the support of the partner(s) to 

participate in the competition. Multiple 

charter schools may be included in the 

partnership so long as they apply in 

partnership with each other and with at 

least one non-chartered public school 

(as defined in this notice) or nonchartered LEA (as defined in this 

notice). 

2. The partnership must comply with 

the requirements for group applications 

set forth in 34 CFR 75.127–129. 

Note: Only an eligible party under the 

competition may apply for a grant or be the 

fiscal agent for a grant. Thus a non-chartered 

public school or a non-chartered LEA would 

not be eligible to be the lead applicant or 

fiscal agent for an exemplary charter school 

collaboration award. 

3. An applicant may submit more 

than one application if each application 

proposes to carry out substantially 

different authorized activities. 

4. Applicants may not have any 

significant compliance issues (as 

defined in this notice), including in the 

areas of student safety, financial 

management, and statutory or regulatory 

compliance. 

Proposed Application Requirements 

An applicant for a Collaboration 

Award must— 

(1) Provide a detailed narrative 

describing (a) the applicant’s past or 

existing collaboration model or models 

(which may involve more than one area 

of collaboration or partner); (b) the 

applicant’s proposal to continue, 

modify, or expand the collaboration 

model or models (which may include 

adding new areas of collaboration or 

partners); and (c) the applicant’s plan to 

disseminate information about the 

collaboration model or models (which 

may include information about best 

practices) to other public schools, 

including chartered schools, nonchartered schools, and non-chartered 

LEAs. The proposed collaboration 

model or models may focus on a wide 

range of areas within the scope of 

activities authorized under section 

5205(a) of the ESEA, which includes, 

but is not limited to, curriculum and 

instruction, data management and 

sharing, organization and management, 

personnel, facilities, finances, Federal 

programs, standards, assessments, 

special education services, English 

learners, students with other special 

needs, student transportation, and 

professional development and training. 

Note: In a particular year, the Secretary 

may restrict applications to one or more areas 

of focus or authorized activity under section 

5205(a) of the ESEA. 

(2) Provide written assurance from 

authorized officials of the entities 

involved in the partnership that all 

participants— 

• Agree to submit an application for 

an award under the competition and 

have read, understand, and agree with 

the application for the competition; and 

• Agree to have the executive 

summary or narrative of the application, 

with proprietary information redacted, 

published on the U.S. Department of 

Education’s Web site (ed.gov), 

data.ed.gov, the National Charter School 

Resource Center Web site 

(charterschoolcenter.org), or any other 

Web site or publication deemed 

appropriate by the Secretary; 

(3) Submit a partnership agreement 

that meets the requirements of 34 CFR 

75.128(b). 

(4) Provide a clear description of the 

goals and desired outcomes of the 

proposed collaboration and current or 

proposed measures that would be used 

to gauge success in meeting those goals 

and desired outcomes. 

(5) Describe any past, existing, or 

anticipated obstacles to implementing 

the collaboration model or models or to 

disseminating information about the 

collaboration model or models, and the 

strategies that were or will be used to 

overcome those obstacles. 

(6) Specify how the award money will 

be used to implement the collaboration 

model or models and to disseminate 

information about the collaboration 

model or models in accordance with 

section 5205(a) of the ESEA. 

(7) Specify how the award money will 

be shared between the partners named 

in the application. If grant activities will 

be carried out by both the applicant (the 

charter school) and its partner(s), the 

applicant must describe in the 

application and in the partnership 

agreement how the award money will be 

allocated between the partners, 

including the applicant. 

Proposed Award Amounts and Funding 

Restrictions 

(1) The Department will announce in 

a notice inviting applications published 

in the Federal Register the estimated 

amount of funds available for a given 

Collaboration Awards competition and 

the number of awards that we expect to 

make. 

(2) A Collaboration Award grantee 

must use the award funds to carry out 

one or more of the following activities: 

(a) Continuing the collaboration model 

or models for which it received the 

award, as described in its grant 

application; (b) modifying the 

collaboration model or models for 

which it received the award, as 

described in the application; (c) 

expanding the collaboration model or 

models for which it received the award 

by adding additional areas of 

collaboration, as described in the 

application; or (d) expanding the 

collaboration model or models for 

which it received the award by adding 

additional partners (schools or LEAs), as 

described in the application. 

Collaboration Award grantees also must 

use award funds to disseminate 

information about the collaboration 

activities to other public schools, 

including chartered schools, nonchartered schools, and non-chartered 

LEAs. All activities carried out under 

the Collaboration Awards must fall 

within the scope of authorized activities 

set forth in section 5205(a) of the ESEA. 

Proposed Selection Criteria 

Background 

The selection criteria we propose are 

designed to— (1) support collaborations 

between charter schools and nonchartered public schools and nonchartered LEAs that are most effective in 

raising student outcomes and creating 

efficiencies; (2) further the CSP’s 

mission of increasing national 

understanding of the charter school 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2012 / Notices 24693 

model; and (3) expand the number of 

high-quality charter schools. 

Selection Criteria 

The Secretary proposes the following 

selection criteria for Collaboration 

Awards competitions and further 

proposes that we may apply one or more 

of these criteria alone or in combination 

with one or more selection criteria (1) 

based on the CSP authorizing statute or 

(2) in 34 CFR 75.210, in any year in 

which this program is in effect. In the 

notice inviting applications or the 

application package, or both, we will 

announce the maximum possible points 

assigned to each criterion. 

The Secretary could make awards to 

the top-rated applications proposing to 

carry out activities in specific areas of 

focus (e.g., curriculum and instruction, 

data management and sharing, 

organization and management) within 

the scope of authorized activities under 

section 5205(a) of the ESEA. In a 

particular year, the Secretary may 

restrict applications to one or more 

areas of focus. Additionally, in making 

awards, the Secretary could fund 

applications out of rank order in order 

to ensure that the Collaboration Awards 

are distributed throughout each area of 

the Nation or a State. 

(1) Record of and potential for 

success. (A) The extent to which the 

applicant’s past or existing collaboration 

model or models have improved 

educational outcomes and operational 

practices, and (B) the extent to which 

the applicant’s proposed collaboration 

model or models and dissemination 

plan will achieve one or more of the 

following demonstrable results: 

(i) Improved operational practices and 

productivity among all partners; 

(ii) Improved student achievement (as 

defined in this notice); 

(iii) Improved high school graduation 

rates; 

(iv) Improved rates of college 

matriculation and college graduation; or 

(v) Improved rates of attendance and 

graduation from other postsecondary 

(i.e., non-college) institutions or 

programs. 

Note: In the notice inviting applications or 

the application package, or both, we may 

assign points individually to the factors 

listed under this selection criterion. 

Note: The Secretary invites comment on 

this criterion particularly with respect to 

measures that might be used to determine the 

extent to which an applicant’s proposed 

collaboration model or models and 

dissemination plan will achieve improved 

operational practices and productivity among 

all partners. 

(2) Quality of the project design. The 

extent to which the applicant proposes 

a high-quality plan to use its award 

money to improve educational 

outcomes and operational practices in 

public schools, including charter 

schools. 

(3) Potential for scalability. The extent 

to which the applicant’s proposed 

collaboration model or models can be 

replicated or adapted beyond the 

participating partners by other public 

schools or non-chartered LEAs and 

sustained long-term. 

(4) Innovation. The extent to which 

the applicant demonstrates that its 

proposed collaboration model or 

models, as well as its dissemination 

plan, are either (a) substantially 

different from other efforts in its area of 

focus; or (b) substantially more effective 

than similar efforts in its area of focus. 

Final Definitions, Requirements, and 

Selection Criteria 

We will announce the final 

definitions, requirements, and selection 

criteria in a notice in the Federal 

Register. We will determine the final 

definitions, requirements, and selection 

criteria after considering responses to 

this notice and other information 

available to the Department. This notice 

does not preclude us from proposing 

priorities or additional definitions, 

requirements, or selection criteria, 

subject to meeting applicable 

rulemaking requirements. 

Note: This notice does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we choose 

to use one or more of these proposed 

definitions, requirements, and selection 

criteria, we will invite applications through 

a notice in the Federal Register. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

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 practical—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 behavior 

changes.’’ 

We are taking this proposed 

regulatory action only on a reasoned 

determination that the benefits justify 

the costs. In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, we selected 

those approaches that maximize net 

benefits. The Department believes that 

this proposed regulatory action is 

consistent with the principles in 

Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action would 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 of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

associated with this regulatory action 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

As part of its continuing effort to 

reduce paperwork and respondent 

burden, the Department conducts a 

preclearance consultation program to 

provide 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. 3506(c)(2)(A)). 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
24694 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2012 / Notices 

This helps ensure that the public 

understands the Department’s collection 

instructions, respondents can provide 

the requested data in the desired format, 

reporting burden (time and financial 

resources) is minimized, collection 

instruments are clearly understood, and 

the Department can properly assess the 

impact of collection requirements on 

respondents. 

We estimate that each applicant 

would spend approximately 176 hours 

of staff time to address the proposed 

requirements and selection criteria, 

prepare the application, and obtain 

necessary clearances. The total number 

of hours for all expected applicants is an 

estimated 7,040 hours. We estimate the 

total cost per hour of the applicant-level 

staff who will carry out this work to be 

$57 per hour. The total estimated cost 

for all applicants would be $401,280. 

We have submitted an Information 

Collection Request (ICR) for this 

collection to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB). If you want to 

comment on the proposed information 

collection requirements, please send 

your comments to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for U.S. 

Department of Education. Send these 

comments by email to 

OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov or by fax 

to (202) 395–6974. You may also send 

a copy of these comments to the 

Department contact named in the 

ADDRESSES section of this notice. 

In preparing your comments you may 

want to review the ICR, which we 

maintain in the Education Department 

Information Collection System (EDICS) 

at http://edicsweb.ed.gov. Click on 

‘‘Browse Pending Collections.’’ This 

proposed collection is identified as 

proposed collection 1855–NEW. This 

ICR is also available on OMB’s RegInfo 

Web site at www.reginfo.gov. 

We consider your comments on this 

proposed collection of information in— 

• Deciding whether the proposed 

collection is necessary for the proper 

performance of our functions, including 

whether the information will have 

practical use; 

• Evaluating the accuracy of our 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

collection, including the validity of our 

methodology and assumptions; 

• Enhancing the quality, usefulness, 

and clarity of the information we 

collect; and 

• Minimizing the burden on those 

who must respond. This includes 

exploring the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques. 

OMB is required to make a decision 

concerning the collection of information 

contained in these proposed definitions, 

requirements, and selection criteria 

between 30 and 60 days after 

publication of this document in the 

Federal Register. Therefore, to ensure 

that OMB gives your comments full 

consideration, it is important that OMB 

receives your comments on the 

proposed collection by May 25, 2012. 

This does not affect the deadline for 

your comments to us on the proposed 

definitions, requirements, and selection 

criteria. 

Please note that a Federal agency 

cannot conduct or sponsor a collection 

of information unless OMB approves the 

collection under the PRA and the 

corresponding information collection 

instrument displays a currently valid 

OMB control number. Notwithstanding 

any other provision of law, no person is 

required to comply with, or is subject to 

penalty for failure to comply with, a 

collection of information if the 

collection instrument does not display a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

We will provide the OMB control 

number when we publish the notice of 

final definitions, requirements, and 

selection criteria. 

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 proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc) on 

request to the contact person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe 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: April 20, 2012. 

James H. Shelton, III, 

Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and 

Improvement. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10005 Filed 4–24–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Environmental Management SiteSpecific Advisory Board, Nevada 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of open meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces a 

meeting of the Environmental 

Management Site-Specific Advisory 

Board (EM SSAB), Nevada. The Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– 

463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public 

notice of this meeting be announced in 

the Federal Register. 

DATES: Wednesday, May 16, 2012, 5 

p.m. 

ADDRESSES: Atomic Testing Museum, 

755 East Flamingo Road, Las Vegas, 

Nevada 89119. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Denise Rupp, Board Administrator, 232 

Energy Way, M/S 505, North Las Vegas, 

Nevada 89030. Phone: (702) 630–0522; 

Fax (702) 295–5300 or Email: 

nssab@nv.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of 

the Board: The purpose of the Board is 

to make recommendations to DOE–EM 

and site management in the areas of 

environmental restoration, waste 

management, and related activities. 

Tentative Agenda: 

1. Groundwater Update 

2. Student Liaison Project Update 

3. Industrial Sites—Long-term 

Monitoring at Closed Sites 

Public Participation: The EM SSAB, 

Nevada, welcomes the attendance of the 

public at its advisory committee 

meetings and will make every effort to 

accommodate persons with physical 

disabilities or special needs. If you 

require special accommodations due to 

a disability, please contact Denise Rupp 

at least seven days in advance of the 

meeting at the phone number listed 

above. Written statements may be filed 

with the Board either before or after the 

meeting. Individuals who wish to make 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES