25470 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2012 / Notices 

access to the Grants.gov help desk to 

address any technical issues related to 

application submission that may arise 

the day before the deadline date. As a 

result of the change in the deadline 

date, we are also extending the Date for 

Intergovernmental Review by one day— 

to July 26, 2012. 

Correction 

An error appears in the Electronic 

Submission of Applications section of 

the March 27 i3 Validation NIA. In 

seven places within that section, the 

notice indicates that applications must 

be fully uploaded and submitted and 

must be date and time stamped by the 

Grants.gov system no later than 4:30 

p.m., Washington, DC time, on the 

application deadline date. These 

references to ‘‘4:30 p.m.’’ should be 

references to ‘‘4:30:00 p.m.’’ For this 

reason, we correct the March 27 i3 

Validation NIA as follows: 

On page 18238, second column, 

second bulleted paragraph, correct the 

three references to ‘‘4:30 p.m.’’ to read 

‘‘4:30:00 p.m.’’. 

On page 18238, third column, sixth 

paragraph, correct the reference to ‘‘4:30 

p.m.’’ to read ‘‘4:30:00 p.m.’’. 

On page 18238, third column, seventh 

paragraph, correct the two references to 

‘‘4:30 p.m.’’ to read ‘‘4:30:00 p.m.’’. 

On page 18239, second column, fifth 

full paragraph, correct the reference to 

‘‘4:30 p.m.’’ to read ‘‘4:30:00 p.m.’’. 

Program Authority: American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Division A, 

Section 14007, Public Law 111–5. 

VIII. Agency Contact 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carol Lyons, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 4W203, Washington, DC 20202– 

5930. Fax: (202) 205–5631. Telephone: 

(202) 453–7122 or by email: i3@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. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document 

and a copy of the application package in 

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

print, audiotape, or compact disc) on 

request to the program contact person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT in this notice. 

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 25, 2012. 

James H. Shelton, III, 

Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and 

Improvement. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10373 Filed 4–27–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

[Docket ID ED–2012–OESE–0002] 

Final Revision to Selection Criteria— 

Enhanced Assessment Instruments; 

CFDA Number: 84.368 

AGENCY: Office of Elementary and 

Secondary Education, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Elementary and Secondary Education 

amends the selection criteria under the 

Enhanced Assessment Instruments 

Grant program, also called the Enhanced 

Assessment Grant (EAG) program, as 

established in the notice of final 

priorities, requirements, definitions, and 

selection criteria published in the 

Federal Register on April 19, 2011 

(2011 NFP). The 2011 NFP established 

specific priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria that 

may be used for the EAG program. The 

revisions in this notice provide the 

Secretary with additional flexibility 

with respect to selection criteria for 

EAG competitions in 2012 that use 

fiscal year (FY) 2011 funds and for 

subsequent competitions. We believe 

that these revisions will enable the 

Department to administer this program 

more effectively, simplify the 

application and review processes, and 

better ensure that the strongest 

applications receive EAG funds. 

DATES: Effective Date: The revisions are 

effective May 30, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Collette Roney, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

room 3W210, Washington, DC 20202. 

Telephone: (202) 401–5245 or by email: 

Collette.Roney@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: 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the EAG program is to enhance the 

quality of assessment instruments and 

systems used by States for measuring 

the academic achievement of 

elementary and secondary school 

students. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7301a. 

We published a notice of proposed 

revisions for this program in the Federal 

Register on January 30, 2012 (77 FR 

4553). That notice contained 

background information and our reasons 

for proposing the revisions relating to 

the use of selection criteria for this 

program. 

Public Comment: In response to our 

invitation in the notice of proposed 

revisions, we did not receive any 

comments. However, as a result of our 

further review of the proposed revisions 

since publication of the notice of 

proposed revisions, we have made one 

change as follows: 

Analysis of Comments and Changes 

Comment: None. 

Discussion: In reviewing the 

statement of the proposed revisions to 

selection criteria further, the 

Department has decided that it may be 

helpful to address the assignment of 

maximum possible points—not only 

with respect to criteria used for 

competitions, but also with respect to 

factors under those criteria. The 

Department has the authority under 34 

CFR 75.201 to assign maximum points 

at the factor level. This change, 

therefore, does not substantively change 

the Department’s authority or practice; 

it merely describes the manner in which 

the Department may indicate whether 

factors under a selection criterion have 

been assigned maximum points. 

Changes: We have added language to 

the statement of revisions to clarify that 

the Department may assign, in the 

notice inviting applications, the 

application package, or both, the 

maximum possible points an applicant 

may earn under each factor under a 

selection criterion. 

Final Revisions to Selection Criteria 

The Secretary may use one or more of 

the selection criteria listed in 

paragraphs (a) through (d) for evaluating 

an application under this program. This 

flexibility includes the authority to 

reduce the number of selection criteria. 

In order to assist peer reviewers in 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2012 / Notices 25471 

1Availability of funds for the EAG program for a 

given year is contingent upon an appropriation of 

funds for the program by the Congress. 

determining the degree to which an 

applicant meets a criterion, the 

Secretary may further define each 

criterion from each of these sources by 

selecting one or more specific factors 

within a criterion or assigning factors 

from one criterion, from any of those 

sources, to another criterion, in any of 

those sources. We may apply one or 

more of these criteria 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 and may also 

assign the maximum possible points for 

each factor. 

Selection criteria for any EAG 

competition may come from: 

(a) The selection criteria established 

in the 2011 NFP. 

(b) The selection criteria in 34 CFR 

75.210. 

(c) Selection criteria based on the 

statutory requirements for the EAG 

program in accordance with 34 CFR 

75.209. 

(d) Any combination of selection 

criteria and factors in paragraphs (a) 

through (c). 

This notice does not preclude us from 

proposing additional priorities, 

requirements, definitions, 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 selection criteria, 

we invite applications through a notice in the 

Federal Register.1

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Secretary must determine whether this 

regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and, 

therefore, subject to the requirements of 

the Executive order and subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (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 principles 

stated in the Executive order. 

This 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 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); 

(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 taking this regulatory action 

only on a reasoned determination that 

its benefits justify its costs. In choosing 

among alternative regulatory 

approaches, we selected those 

approaches that maximize net benefits. 

Based on the analysis that follows, the 

Department believes that these 

regulations are consistent with the 

principles in Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action does not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and Tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits 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. 

Summary of Potential Costs and 

Benefits 

This regulatory action affects only 

State educational agencies (SEAs) or 

consortia of SEAs applying for 

assistance under the EAG program. It 

creates flexibility for the Department, 

with respect to EAG competitions in 

2012 for FY 2011 funds and for 

subsequent competitions, to select from 

among, or to combine, selection criteria 

that were established in the 2011 NFP 

criteria, selection criteria from 34 CFR 

75.210, and other selection criteria 

based on the statute under 34 CFR 

75.209. This flexibility allows the 

Department to align selection criteria 

with program needs and ensure that the 

strongest applications are selected for 

funding under the program. 

This flexibility does not impose a 

financial burden that SEAs would not 

otherwise incur in the development and 

submission of a grant application under 

the EAG program. In addition, under 

some circumstances (for example, if the 

Department elected to use fewer criteria 

or factors in a given competition), the 

revisions could reduce the financial 

burden of preparing an EAG grant 

application by a modest amount. 

Moreover, the Department typically 

only receives a small number of 

applications for this program, which 

further serves to mitigate any potential 

costs because few entities are affected. 

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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

25472 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2012 / Notices 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

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

print, audiotape, or computer diskette) 

on request to the program 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 25, 2012. 

Michael Yudin, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10357 Filed 4–27–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Amended Notice of Intent To Modify 

the Scope of the Environmental Impact 

Statement for the Champlain Hudson 

Power Express Transmission Line 

Project in New York State 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Amended Notice of Intent. 

SUMMARY: The United States (U.S.) 

Department of Energy (DOE) intends to 

modify the scope of the Champlain 

Hudson Power Express Transmission 

Line Project Environmental Impact 

Statement (CHPE EIS; DOE/EIS–0447) 

and to conduct additional public 

scoping. As described in the original 

Notice of Intent (NOI) (75 FR 34720; 

June 18, 2010), in January 2010, 

Transmission Developers Inc. (TDI) 

submitted, on behalf of Champlain 

Hudson Power Express, Inc. 

(Applicant), an application to DOE for a 

Presidential permit for the Champlain 

Hudson Power Express (Champlain 

Hudson) project. As explained in the 

NOI, DOE will assess the potential 

environmental impacts associated with 

the construction, operation, 

maintenance, and connection of the 

proposed new electric transmission line 

across the U.S.-Canada border in 

northeastern New York State. Public 

scoping originally closed on August 2, 

2010. On February 28, 2012, TDI 

submitted an amendment to the 

application for a Presidential permit to 

DOE that reflects proposed changes to 

the route of the Champlain Hudson 

project, and DOE now intends to revise 

the scope of the EIS to address these 

proposed changes. The proposed 

changes are the result of settlement 

negotiations among New York (NY) 

State agencies, Champlain Hudson 

Power Express, Inc., CHPE Properties, 

Inc. and other stakeholders as part of the 

project review under Article VII of the 

New York State Public Service Law, and 

are reflected in a February 24, 2012, 

‘‘Joint Proposal’’ submitted to the New 

York Public Service Commission. 

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, New 

York Field Office (USFWS Region 5), 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(USACE), the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA Region 2), the 

New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), 

and the New York State Department of 

Public Service (NYSDPS) are 

cooperating agencies in the preparation 

of the EIS. 

DATES: DOE is accepting public 

comments on the revised scope of the 

CHPE EIS until June 14, 2012. DOE will 

consider comments submitted after this 

date to the extent practicable. 

ADDRESSES: Please direct written 

comments on the scope of the EIS and 

requests to be added to the document 

mailing list to: Brian Mills, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy 

Reliability (OE–20), U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585; by 

electronic mail to 

Brian.Mills@hq.doe.gov; or by facsimile 

to 202–586–8008. For general 

information on the DOE NEPA process 

contact: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, 

Director, Office of NEPA Policy and 

Compliance (GC–54), U.S. Department 

of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585; telephone 

202–586–4600, or leave a message at 1– 

800–472–2756; by facsimile at 202–586– 

7031; or send an email to 

askNEPA@hq.doe.gov. 

For information on the USFWS’s role 

as a cooperating agency, contact Tim R. 

Sullivan by electronic mail at 

Tim_R_Sullivan@fws.gov; by phone at 

602–753–9334; or by mail at 3817 Luker 

Road, Cortland, NY 13045. 

For information on the Army Corps of 

Engineers’ permit process, contact 

Naomi J. Handell by electronic mail at 

Naomi.J.Handell@usace.army.mil; or by 

mail at 696 Virginia Road, Concord, MA 

01742. 

For information on the EPA’s role as 

a cooperating agency, contact Lingard 

Knutson by electronic mail at 

Knutson.Lingard@epamail.epa.gov; by 

phone at 212–637–3747; or by mail at 

290 Broadway, Mail Code: 25th Floor, 

New York, NY 10007–1866. 

For information on the New York 

State Department of Environmental 

Conservation’s role as a cooperating 

agency, contact Patricia Desnoyers by 

electronic mail to 

pjdesnoy@gw.dec.state.ny.us; or by mail 

at 625 Broadway, Albany, NY 12233. 

For information on the New York 

State Department of Public Service’s 

role as a cooperating agency, contact 

James Austin by electronic mail at 

james_austin@dps.state.ny.us; or by 

mail at 3 Empire State Plaza, Albany, 

NY 12223. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Executive Order (E.O.) 10485, 

Providing for the performance of certain 

functions heretofore performed by the 

President with respect to electric power 

and natural gas facilities located on the 

borders of the United States, as 

amended by E.O. 12038 Relating to 

certain Functions transferred to the 

Secretary of Energy by the Department 

of Energy Organization Act, requires 

issuance of a Presidential permit by 

DOE before electric transmission 

facilities may be constructed, operated, 

maintained, or connected at the U.S. 

international border. The E.O. provides 

that a Presidential permit may be issued 

after a finding that the proposed project 

is consistent with the public interest 

and after favorable recommendations 

from the U.S. Departments of State and 

Defense. In determining consistency 

with the public interest, DOE considers 

the potential environmental impacts of 

the proposed project under NEPA, 

determines the project’s impact on 

electric reliability (including whether 

the proposed project would adversely 

affect the operation of the U.S. electric 

power supply system under normal and 

contingency conditions), and considers 

any other factors that DOE may find 

relevant to the public interest. The 

regulations implementing the E.O. have 

been codified at 10 CFR 205.320– 

205.329. DOE’s issuance of a 

Presidential permit would indicate that 

there is no Federal objection to the 

project, but would not mandate that the 

project be constructed. 

On January 25, 2010, TDI submitted 

an application, on behalf of Champlain 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES