47284 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Notices 

Burden Hours: 400. 

Abstract: The Jacob K. Javits 

Fellowship Program is authorized by 

Title VII, Part A, Subpart 1 of the Higher 

Education Act of 1965, as amended 

(HEA), and provides up to four years of 

financial assistance to students to 

undertake graduate study at the doctoral 

and Master of Fine Arts level in selected 

fields of arts, humanities, and social 

sciences. Fellows are selected on the 

basis of (1) superior academic ability 

demonstrated by their achievements and 

exceptional promise; and (2) financial 

need. The amounts of new and 

continuing awards are based on a 

student’s financial need as determined 

by the Title IV, Part F needs analysis 

system. Each individual fellow’s need 

must be assessed and reported each 

year, along with a continuing fellow’s 

academic progress as determined by the 

institution. This collection is completed 

annually by grantee institutions to 

report on the fellows’ progress and 

levels of financial need for the next 

academic year. The Department of 

Education (ED) uses this data to 

calculate fellowship amounts and the 

total grant amount sent to each 

institution for each fiscal year. 

Requests for 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 4358. 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 when making your request. 

Comments regarding burden and/or 

the collection activity requirements 

should be electronically mailed to 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who 

use a telecommunications device for the 

deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 

1–800–877–8339. 

[FR Doc. 2010–19325 Filed 8–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: Department of Education. 

SUMMARY: The Director, Information 

Collection Clearance Division, 

Regulatory Information Management 

Services, Office of Management invites 

comments on the submission for OMB 

review as required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13). 

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before 

September 7, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be addressed to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attention: Education Desk Officer, 

Office of Management and Budget, 725 

17th Street, NW., Room 10222, New 

Executive Office Building, Washington, 

DC 20503, be faxed to (202) 395–5806 or 

e-mailed to 

oira_submission@omb.eop.gov with a 

cc: to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) requires that 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) provide interested Federal 

agencies and the public an early 

opportunity to comment on information 

collection requests. The OMB is 

particularly interested in comments 

which: 

• Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

• Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

• Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Dated: July 30, 2010. 

Darrin A. King, 

Director, Information Collection Clearance 

Division, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of Management. 

Institute of Education Sciences 

Type of Review: New. 

Title of Collection: Study of Teacher 

Residency Programs. 

OMB#: 1850–NEW. 

Agency Form Number(s): N/A. 

Frequency of Responses: On 

Occasion. 

Affected Public: Individuals and 

households; Not-for-profit institutions; 

State, Local or Tribal Governments. 

Estimated Number of Annual 

Responses: 457. 

Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 524. 

Abstract: This package requests 

clearance to recruit teacher residency 

programs (TRPs), districts, and schools 

for a rigorous evaluation of TRPs. This 

evaluation will provide important 

implementation information on TRPs 

funded by the U.S. Department of 

Education, as well as information on the 

impact of teachers who participate in 

TRPs (including some funded by ED) on 

student achievement. Study findings 

will be presented in two reports, one 

scheduled for release in Fall 2013 and 

the other in Fall 2014. 

Requests for copies of the information 

collection submission for OMB review 

may be accessed from the RegInfo.gov 

Web site at http://www.reginfo.gov/ 

public/do/PRAMain or from the 

Department’s Web site at http:// 

edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the 

‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and 

by clicking on link number 4311. 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 the Internet address 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202– 

401–0920. Please specify the complete 

title and OMB Control Number of the 

information collection 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. 

[FR Doc. 2010–19317 Filed 8–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

[Docket ID ED–OS–2010–0011] 

RIN 1894–AA00 

Secretary’s Priorities for Discretionary 

Grant Programs 

AGENCY: Department of Education. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed priorities. 

SUMMARY: The Secretary of Education 

proposes priorities that the Department 

of Education (Department) may use for 

any appropriate discretionary grant 

program in fiscal year (FY) 2011 and 

future years. We take this action to focus 

Federal financial assistance on 

expanding the number of programs and 

projects Department-wide that support 

activities in areas of greatest educational 

need. We are establishing these 

priorities on a Department-wide basis. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Notices 47285 

1Heckman, JJ and D Masterov. 2004. The 

Productivity Argument for Investing in Young 

Children. Working Paper No. 5, Invest in Kids 

Working Group, Washington, DC. 

This action will permit all offices in the 

Department to use, as appropriate for 

particular discretionary grant programs, 

one or more of these priorities in any 

discretionary grant competition. We also 

propose definitions of key terms used in 

these proposed priorities. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before September 7, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

or via postal mail, commercial delivery, 

or hand delivery. We will not accept 

comments by fax or by e-mail. Please 

submit your comments only one time in 

order to ensure that we do not receive 

duplicate copies. In addition, please 

include the Docket ID and the term 

‘‘Department Priorities’’ at the top of 

your comments. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://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 ‘‘How To Use 

This Site.’’ 

• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, 

or Hand Delivery. If you mail or deliver 

your comments about these proposed 

priorities, address them to: Office of 

Innovation and Improvement 

(Attention: Department Priorities 

Comments), U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

room 4W321, Washington, DC 20202. 

• Privacy Note: The Department’s 

policy for comments received from 

members of the public (including those 

comments submitted by mail, 

commercial delivery, or hand delivery) 

is to make these submissions available 

for public viewing in their entirety on 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, 

commenters should be careful to 

include in their comments only 

information that they wish to make 

publicly available on the Internet. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Margo Anderson. Telephone: 

(202) 205–3010 or by e-mail: 

Margo.Anderson@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), 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 priorities, we urge you to 

identify clearly the specific proposed 

priority that each comment addresses. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Order 12866 

and its overall requirement of reducing 

regulatory burden that might result from 

these proposed priorities. Please let us 

know of any further ways we could 

reduce potential costs or increase 

potential benefits while preserving the 

effective and efficient administration of 

the Department’s programs. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about this notice in room 4W335, 400 

Maryland Avenue, SW., Washington, 

DC, between the hours of 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 these proposed priorities. 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. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e–3. 

Proposed Priorities 

The Secretary proposes thirteen 

priorities that the Department may use, 

as appropriate, for discretionary grant 

competitions in FY 2011 and future 

years. These priorities will allow the 

Department and, by extension, program 

participants to focus limited Federal 

resources on areas of greatest 

educational need. The Secretary 

recognizes that some of the priorities 

will not be appropriate for particular 

programs. 

Background 

The President has set a clear goal for 

our education system: by 2020, the 

United States will once again lead the 

world in the proportion of citizens 

holding college degrees or other 

postsecondary credentials. To support 

the national effort to meet this goal, the 

Secretary has outlined an ambitious, 

comprehensive education agenda that 

includes early learning programs that 

help ensure that children are ready to 

succeed in school, elementary and 

secondary schools that keep every child 

on track to graduate from high school 

with the knowledge and skills needed 

for success in college and careers, and 

a higher education system that gives 

every individual the opportunity to 

attend and graduate from postsecondary 

programs. To ensure that the 

Department’s discretionary grant 

programs effectively spur innovation, 

promote the development and 

implementation of effective and 

sustainable practices, and support 

adoption and implementation of 

necessary reforms, the Secretary 

proposes priorities in three key areas: 

advancing key cradle-to-career 

educational reforms, addressing the 

needs of student subgroups, and 

building capacity for systemic 

continuous improvement. 

Types of Priorities 

When inviting applications for a 

competition using one or more 

priorities, we designate each priority as 

absolute, competitive preference, or 

invitational through a notice in the 

Federal Register. The effect of each type 

of priority follows: 

Absolute priority: Under an absolute 

priority, we consider only applications 

that meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3)). 

Competitive preference priority: We 

give competitive preference to an 

application by (1) awarding additional 

points, depending on the extent to 

which the application meets the priority 

(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting 

an application that meets the priority 

over an application of comparable merit 

that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(2)(ii)). 

Invitational priority: Under an 

invitational priority we are particularly 

interested in applications that meet the 

priority. However, we do not give an 

application that meets the priority a 

preference over other applications (34 

CFR 75.105(c)(1)). 

Proposed Priorities 

I. Advancing Key Cradle-to-Career 

Educational Reforms 

Proposed Priority 1—Improving Early 

Learning Outcomes 

Background. High-quality early 

learning programs for high-need 

children can help prevent the 

development of gaps in skills and 

achievement, reduce grade retention, 

and help ensure that high-need children 

are successful in school and life.1

Statement of Proposed Priority 1. 

Projects that are designed to improve 

school readiness and success for highneed children (as defined in this notice) 

from birth through third grade through 

a focus on one or more of the following 

priority areas: 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

47286 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Notices 

2These five domains of early learning are adopted 

from those identified by the National Education 

Goals Panel. Sharon Lynn Kagan et al., 

Reconsidering Children’s Early Development and 

Learning: Toward Common Views and Vocabulary 

(Washington, DC: National Education Goals Panel, 

1995). 

(a) Physical well-being and motor 

development. 

(b) Social-emotional development. 

(c) Language and literacy 

development. 

(d) Cognition and general knowledge, 

including early numeracy and early 

scientific development. 

(e) Approaches toward learning.2

Proposed Priority 2—Implementing 

Internationally Benchmarked, Collegeand Career-Ready Elementary and 

Secondary Academic Standards 

Background. Many States are moving 

toward the adoption of common, 

internationally benchmarked, collegeand career-ready academic standards for 

elementary and secondary school 

students. States will benefit from 

assistance in transitioning to these new 

standards, including assistance in 

developing and implementing (a) highquality instructional materials, (b) 

assessments aligned with the standards, 

(c) teacher and principal preparation 

and professional development 

programs, and (d) other strategies that 

translate the standards into classroom 

practice. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 2. 

Projects that are designed to support the 

implementation of internationally 

benchmarked, college- and career-ready 

academic standards held in common by 

multiple States, including projects in 

one or more of the following priority 

areas: 

(a) The development or 

implementation of assessments (e.g., 

summative, formative, interim) aligned 

with those standards. 

(b) The development or 

implementation of instructional 

materials aligned with those standards. 

(c) The development or 

implementation of professional 

development or preparation programs 

aligned with those standards. 

(d) Strategies that translate the 

standards into classroom practice. 

Proposed Priority 3—Improving the 

Effectiveness and Distribution of 

Effective Teachers or Principals 

Background. While educator quality 

is a critical contributor to student 

learning, there is dramatic variation in 

educator effectiveness within and across 

schools, including significant inequity 

in the distribution of effective educators 

between high- and low-poverty schools. 

Proposed priority 3 is intended to 

support projects designed to increase 

the number and percentage of effective 

and highly effective teachers or 

principals, or help increase the 

retention and equitable distribution of 

effective and highly effective teachers or 

principals. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 3. 

Projects that are designed to address one 

or more of the following priority areas: 

(a) Increasing the number or 

percentage of effective and highly 

effective teachers or principals (as 

defined in this notice) or reducing the 

number or percentage of teachers or 

principals who are ineffective, 

particularly in high-poverty schools (as 

defined in this notice). 

(b) Increasing the retention and 

equitable distribution of effective and 

highly effective teachers or principals 

(as defined in this notice). 

Proposed Priority 4—Turning Around 

Persistently Lowest-Achieving Schools 

Background. An essential element in 

strengthening our education system is 

dramatic improvement of student 

performance in each State’s persistently 

lowest-achieving schools. These schools 

often require intensive interventions to 

improve the school culture and climate, 

strengthen the school staff and 

instructional program, increase student 

attendance and enrollment in advanced 

courses, provide more time for learning, 

and ensure that social services and 

community support are available for 

students in order to raise student 

achievement, graduation rates, and 

college enrollment rates. In addition, 

students in these schools can benefit 

from participating in programs that offer 

additional services designed to increase 

student success. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 4. 

Projects that are designed to address one 

or more of the following priority areas: 

(a) Improving student achievement (as 

defined in this notice) in persistently 

lowest-achieving schools (as defined in 

this notice). 

(b) Increasing graduation rates (as 

defined in this notice) and college 

enrollment rates for students in 

persistently lowest-achieving schools 

(as defined in this notice). 

(c) Providing services to students 

enrolled in persistently lowestachieving schools (as defined in this 

notice). 

Proposed Priority 5—Increasing 

Postsecondary Success 

Background. Meeting the President’s 

goal of restoring the United States to 

first in the world in the percentage of 

citizens holding college degrees or other 

postsecondary credentials will require 

significantly increasing the number of 

high-need students who graduate from 

high school prepared to succeed in 

higher education and careers and who 

have access to college or rigorous 

postsecondary career or technical 

training leading to a degree or 

certificate. It will also require increasing 

the rates at which young people and 

adults enroll in, persist in, and complete 

college or other postsecondary training. 

This priority is designed to support 

efforts to reach the President’s goal. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 5. 

Projects that are designed to address one 

or more of the following priority areas: 

(a) Increasing the rates at which highneed students (as defined in this notice) 

are academically prepared for and enroll 

in college or other postsecondary 

education and training. 

(b) Increasing the rates at which highneed students (as defined in this notice) 

persist in and complete college or other 

postsecondary education and training. 

(c) Increasing the rates at which highneed students (as defined in this notice) 

enroll in and complete high-quality 

secondary or postsecondary career and 

technical courses or programs of study 

(as defined in this notice) designed to 

lead to a degree, credential, or 

certificate. 

(d) Increasing the number of 

individuals who return to the 

educational system to obtain a high 

school diploma, to obtain needed basic 

skills enhancement, or to enter, persist 

in, and complete college or rigorous 

postsecondary career or technical 

training leading to a degree, credential, 

or certificate. 

(e) Increasing the rates at which highneed students (as defined in this notice) 

enroll in and complete graduate 

programs. 

II. Addressing Needs of Student 

Subgroups 

Proposed Priority 6—Improving 

Achievement and High School 

Graduation Rates of Rural and HighNeed Students 

Background. The Nation suffers from 

persistent gaps in achievement and 

graduation rates between the Nation’s 

high-need students, including students 

at risk of educational failure or 

otherwise in need of special assistance 

and support, such as students who are 

living in poverty, who are English 

language learners, who are far below 

grade level, who have left school before 

receiving a regular high school diploma, 

who are at risk of not graduating with 

a diploma on time, who are homeless, 

who are in foster care, who have been 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Notices 47287 

incarcerated, or who have disabilities, 

and their more advantaged peers. 

Accelerating the achievement and 

graduation rates of these students, 

including re-engaging individuals who 

have dropped out of school, is essential 

to improving the life outcomes for these 

students and to sustaining our economic 

and civic future. In addition, students in 

rural areas can face specific challenges 

to learning based on isolation and lack 

of local resources. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 6. 

Projects that are designed to address one 

or more of the following priority areas: 

(a) Accelerating learning and helping 

to improve high school graduation rates 

(as defined in this notice) and college 

enrollment rates for students in rural 

communities. 

(b) Accelerating learning and helping 

to improve high school graduation rates 

(as defined in this notice) and college 

enrollment rates for high-need students 

(as defined in this notice). 

(c) Accelerating learning and helping 

to improve high school graduation rates 

(as defined in this notice) and college 

enrollment in high-poverty schools (as 

defined in this notice). 

Proposed Priority 7—Promoting Science, 

Technology, Engineering, and 

Mathematics (STEM) Education 

Background. Increasing the number of 

students with interest, knowledge, and 

skills in STEM is essential to the 

success of our students and the health 

of our economy. This will require 

increasing the proportion of students 

prepared for careers in STEM who are 

from groups traditionally underrepresented in these careers, including 

minorities, individuals with disabilities, 

and women. Strategies that schools and 

institutions can use to help meet this 

goal include offering rigorous and 

engaging courses of study in STEM 

subjects; collaborating with industry 

experts, museums, universities, research 

centers, or other STEM-capable 

community partners to prepare and 

assist teachers in promoting effective 

and relevant instruction and offering 

applied learning opportunities for 

students; and preparing more students 

for advanced study in STEM. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 7. 

Projects that are designed to address one 

or more of the following priority areas: 

(a) Providing students with increased 

access to rigorous and engaging courses 

of study in STEM. 

(b) Increasing the number of students 

prepared for advanced postsecondary or 

graduate study and careers in STEM, 

with a specific focus on an increase in 

the proportion of students so prepared 

who are from groups traditionally 

under-represented in STEM careers, 

including minorities, individuals with 

disabilities, and women. 

(c) Increasing the opportunities for 

high-quality preparation of, or 

professional development for, teachers 

of STEM subjects. 

Proposed Priority 8—Promoting 

Diversity 

Background. Local educational 

agencies and postsecondary institutions 

have found that providing diverse 

learning environments and, in the case 

of local educational agencies, avoiding 

the racial isolation of their student body 

can provide substantial educational 

benefits. These benefits include, among 

other things, improving educational 

outcomes, promoting cross-racial 

understanding, breaking down racial 

stereotypes, and preparing students for 

an increasingly diverse workforce and 

society. By encouraging local 

educational agencies and postsecondary 

institutions to take steps to promote 

student body diversity, including racial 

and ethnic diversity, and, in the case of 

local educational agencies, to avoid 

racial isolation, the Department can 

assist these agencies and institutions in 

better preparing their students to 

compete in the global marketplace. Any 

steps taken by these agencies and 

institutions to further these efforts must 

be done in accordance with applicable 

U.S. Supreme Court precedent. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 8. 

Projects that are designed to promote 

student diversity, including racial and 

ethnic diversity, or avoid racial 

isolation. 

Proposed Priority 9—Support for 

Military Families 

Background. Military deployments 

following the terrorist attacks of 

September 11, 2001, have placed an 

enormous strain on military families 

and their children. Over 80 percent of 

children of active-duty military 

personnel who are in elementary or 

secondary school attend public schools 

in the United States. Through a 

Memorandum of Understanding, the 

Department of Education and the 

Department of Defense acknowledge the 

unique educational needs and 

challenges faced by the children of 

military servicemen and servicewomen. 

This priority is part of the 

Administration’s commitment to the 

families of its servicemen and 

servicewomen. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 9. 

Projects that are designed to address the 

needs of military-connected students (as 

defined in this notice). 

III. Building Capacity for Systemic 

Continuous Improvement 

Proposed Priority 10—Enabling More 

Data-Based Decision-Making 

Background. Accurate, timely, 

relevant, and appropriate data are the 

key to knowing what is working for 

students and what is not. Data can tell 

us which students are on track to 

college- and career-readiness and which 

need additional support, which 

instructional strategies are working, 

which schools or institutions are doing 

better at improving student learning and 

performance, and which teachers or 

faculty excel in increasing student 

achievement so that they can, for 

example, be given the opportunity to 

coach others or to lead communities of 

professional practice. Data and the 

effective use of data for informed 

decision-making are essential to the 

continuous improvement of educational 

results. 

This proposed priority is designed to 

support projects that provide educators, 

as well as families and other key 

stakeholders, with the data they need 

and the capacity and training to use 

those data to improve school readiness, 

respond to the learning and academic 

needs of students, increase student 

achievement (as defined in this notice), 

improve educator effectiveness, inform 

professional development practices and 

approaches, understand the culture and 

climate of their schools and institutions, 

and make informed decisions that 

increase overall program effectiveness. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 10. 

Projects that are designed to collect (or 

obtain), analyze, and use high-quality 

and timely data, especially on program 

participant outcomes, in accordance 

with privacy requirements (as defined 

in this notice), in one of the following 

priority areas: 

(a) Improving instructional practices, 

policies, and student outcomes in early 

learning settings. 

(b) Improving instructional practices, 

policies and student outcomes in 

elementary and secondary schools. 

(c) Improving postsecondary student 

outcomes relating to enrollment, 

persistence, and completion and leading 

to career success. 

(d) Providing reliable and 

comprehensive information on the 

implementation of Department of 

Education programs, and participant 

outcomes in these programs, especially 

by developing strategies with 

appropriate State agencies to use data 

from State longitudinal data systems or 

by obtaining data from reliable thirdparty sources. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

47288 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Notices 

3 70 FR 3586 (Jan. 25, 2005). 

Proposed Priority 11—Building 

Evidence of Effectiveness 

Background. The strongest available 

empirical evidence should inform 

decisions about education practices and 

policies. Evidence accumulates through 

evaluation of practices and of program 

performance and, as more robust 

evidence becomes available, 

increasingly rigorous evaluations 

become appropriate. Random 

assignment and quasi-experimental 

designs are considered the most 

rigorous evidence of the impact of a 

program because these designs are best 

able to eliminate plausible competing 

explanations for observed results. The 

Department’s notice of final priority on 

scientifically based evaluation methods, 

published on January 25, 2005 in the 

Federal Register,3 has made it possible 

for the Department to expand the 

number of programs and projects 

Department-wide that are evaluated 

using experimental and quasiexperimental designs. This priority 

remains in effect; however, recognizing 

that using such research designs is not 

always feasible and that, in some cases, 

other designs are more appropriate to 

the question being asked, priority 11 

would support rigorous evaluation 

studies consistent with the principles of 

scientific research in order to enable 

better understanding of the relationship 

between intervention, implementation, 

and student outcomes. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 11. 

Projects that propose evaluation plans 

that are likely to produce valid and 

reliable evidence in one or more of the 

following priority areas: 

(a) Improving project design and 

implementation or designing more 

effective future projects to improve 

outcomes. 

(b) Identifying and improving 

practices, strategies, and policies that 

may contribute to improving outcomes. 

Under this priority, at a minimum, the 

outcome of interest is to be measured 

multiple times before and after the 

treatment for project participants and, 

where feasible, for a comparison group 

of non-participants. 

Proposed Priority 12—Supporting 

Programs, Practices, or Strategies for 

Which There is Strong or Moderate 

Evidence of Effectiveness 

Background. Using good evidence to 

inform decision-making and building 

better evidence over time are crucial 

components of continuous program 

improvement. This proposed priority is 

designed to support projects that use the 

best available evidence in designing and 

implementing programs and strategies. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 12. 

Projects that are supported by strong or 

moderate evidence (as defined in this 

notice). A project that is supported by 

strong evidence (as defined in this 

notice) will receive more points than a 

project that is supported by moderate 

evidence (as defined in this notice). 

Proposed Priority 13—Improving 

Productivity 

Background. High-performing 

organizations consistently seek to 

improve the effectiveness of their 

processes and staff to achieve the best 

possible results in the most efficient 

manner. One tool for improving 

productivity is to redesign processes 

and structures to take advantage of the 

power of technology to improve 

learning outcomes while making more 

efficient use of time, money, and staff. 

In times of tight budgets, closely 

examining spending and reallocating 

resources toward more efficient and 

more cost-effective strategies are even 

more essential. 

Statement of Proposed Priority 13. 

Projects that are designed to 

significantly increase efficiency in the 

use of time, staff, money, or other 

resources. Such projects may include 

innovative and sustainable uses of 

technology, modification of school 

schedules, use of open educational 

resources (as defined in this notice), or 

other strategies that improve results and 

increase productivity. 

Proposed Definitions 

Background: We propose definitions 

for several important terms associated 

with these priorities. 

Proposed Definitions: The Secretary 

proposes the following definitions for 

the Department priorities. 

Carefully matched comparison group 

design means a type of quasiexperimental study (as defined in this 

notice) that attempts to approximate an 

experimental study (as defined in this 

notice). More specifically, it is a design 

in which project participants are 

matched with non-participants based on 

key characteristics that are thought to be 

related to the outcome. These 

characteristics include, but are not 

limited to: 

(1) Prior test scores and other 

measures of academic achievement 

(preferably, the same measures that the 

study will use to evaluate outcomes for 

the two groups); 

(2) Demographic characteristics, such 

as age, disability, gender, English 

proficiency, ethnicity, poverty level, 

parents’ educational attainment, and 

single- or two-parent family 

background; 

(3) The time period in which the two 

groups are studied (e.g., the two groups 

are children entering kindergarten in the 

same year as opposed to sequential 

years); and 

(4) Methods used to collect outcome 

data (e.g., the same test of reading skills 

administered in the same way to both 

groups). 

Effective principal means a school 

principal whose students, overall and 

for each subgroup, achieve acceptable 

rates (e.g., at least one grade level in an 

academic year) of student growth (as 

defined in this notice). A method for 

determining if a principal is effective 

must include multiple measures, and 

effectiveness must be evaluated, in 

significant part, on the basis of student 

growth (as defined in this notice). 

Supplemental measures may include, 

for example, high school graduation 

rates (as defined in this notice) and 

college enrollment rates, as well as 

evidence of providing supportive 

teaching and learning conditions, strong 

instructional leadership, and positive 

family and community engagement. 

Effective teacher means a teacher 

whose students achieve acceptable rates 

(e.g., at least one grade level in an 

academic year) of student growth (as 

defined in this notice). A method for 

determining if a teacher is effective 

must include multiple measures, and 

effectiveness must be evaluated, in 

significant part, on the basis of student 

growth (as defined in this notice). 

Supplemental measures may include, 

for example, multiple observation-based 

assessments of teacher performance. 

Experimental study means a study 

that employs random assignment of, for 

example, students, teachers, classrooms, 

schools, or districts to participate in a 

project being evaluated (treatment 

group) or not to participate in the 

project (control group). The effect of the 

project is the average difference in 

outcomes between the treatment and 

control groups. 

Graduation rate means a four-year 

adjusted cohort graduation rate 

consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1) and 

may also include an extended-year 

adjusted cohort graduation rate 

consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(v) if 

the State in which the proposed project 

is implemented has been approved by 

the Secretary to use such a rate under 

Title I of the ESEA. 

Highly effective principal means a 

principal whose students, overall and 

for each subgroup, achieve high rates 

(e.g., one and one-half grade levels in an 

academic year) of student growth (as 

defined in this notice). A method for 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Notices 47289 

4A single subject or single case design is an 

adaptation of an interrupted time series design that 

relies on the comparison of treatment effects on a 

single subject or group of single subjects. There is 

little confidence that findings based on this design 

would be the same for other members of the 

population. In some single subject designs, 

treatment reversal or multiple baseline designs are 

used to increase internal validity. In a treatment 

reversal design, after a pretreatment or baseline 

outcome measurement is compared with a post 

treatment measure, the treatment would then be 

stopped for a period of time; a second baseline 

measure of the outcome would be taken, followed 

by a second application of the treatment or a 

different treatment. A multiple baseline design 

addresses concerns about the effects of normal 

development, timing of the treatment, and amount 

of the treatment with treatment-reversal designs by 

using a varying time schedule for introduction of 

the treatment and/or treatments of different lengths 

or intensity. 

determining if a principal is highly 

effective must include multiple 

measures, provided that principal 

effectiveness is evaluated, in significant 

part, on the basis of student growth (as 

defined in this notice). Supplemental 

measures may include, for example, 

high school graduation rates (as defined 

in this notice); college enrollment rates; 

evidence of providing supportive 

teaching and learning conditions, strong 

instructional leadership, and positive 

family and community engagement; or 

evidence of attracting, developing, and 

retaining high numbers of effective 

teachers. 

Highly effective teacher means a 

teacher whose students achieve high 

rates (e.g., one and one-half grade levels 

in an academic year) of student growth 

(as defined in this notice). A method of 

determining if a teacher is highly 

effective must include multiple 

measures, provided that teacher 

effectiveness is evaluated, in significant 

part, on the basis of student growth (as 

defined in this notice). Supplemental 

measures may include, for example, 

multiple observation-based assessments 

of teacher performance or evidence of 

leadership roles (which may include 

mentoring or leading professional 

learning communities) that increase the 

effectiveness of other teachers in the 

school or LEA. 

High-need children and high-need 

students means children and students at 

risk of educational failure or otherwise 

in need of special assistance and 

support, such as children and students 

who are living in poverty, who are 

English language learners, who are far 

below grade level, who have left school 

before receiving a regular high school 

diploma, who are at risk of not 

graduating with a diploma on time, who 

are homeless, who are in foster care, 

who have been incarcerated, or who 

have disabilities. 

High-poverty school means a school 

in which at least 50 percent of students 

are eligible for free or reduced-price 

lunches under the Richard B. Russell 

National School Lunch Act or in which 

at least 50 percent of students are from 

low-income families as determined 

using one of the criteria specified under 

section 1113(a)(5) of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act of 1965, as 

amended. For middle and high schools, 

eligibility may be calculated on the 

basis of comparable data from feeder 

schools. Eligibility as a high-poverty 

school under this definition is 

determined on the basis of the most 

currently available data. 

Interrupted time series design 4 means 

a type of quasi-experimental study (as 

defined in this notice) in which the 

outcome of interest is measured 

multiple times before and after the 

treatment for program participants only. 

If the program had an impact, the 

outcomes after treatment will have a 

different slope or level from those before 

treatment. That is, the series should 

show an ‘‘interruption’’ of the prior 

situation at the time when the program 

was implemented. Adding a comparison 

group time series, such as schools not 

participating in the program or schools 

participating in the program in a 

different geographic area, substantially 

increases the reliability of the findings. 

Military-connected student means a 

student in pre-kindergarten through 

grade 12 who has a parent or guardian 

on active duty in the uniformed 

services, as defined by 37 U.S.C. 101, in 

the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine 

Corps, Coast Guard, National Guard, or 

the reserve component of any of the 

aforementioned services. 

Moderate evidence means evidence 

from previous studies whose designs 

can support causal conclusions (i.e., 

studies with high internal validity) but 

have limited generalizability (i.e., 

moderate external validity), or studies 

with high external validity but moderate 

internal validity. The following would 

constitute moderate evidence: 

(1) At least one well-designed and 

well-implemented (as defined in this 

notice) experimental or quasiexperimental study (as defined in this 

notice) supporting the effectiveness of 

the practice, strategy, or program, with 

small sample sizes or other conditions 

of implementation or analysis that limit 

generalizability; 

(2) At least one well-designed and 

well-implemented (as defined in this 

notice) experimental or quasiexperimental study (as defined in this 

notice) that does not demonstrate 

equivalence between the intervention 

and comparison groups at program entry 

but that has no other major flaws related 

to internal validity; or 

(3) Correlational research with strong 

statistical controls for selection bias and 

for discerning the influence of internal 

factors. 

Open educational resources (OER) 

means teaching, learning, and research 

resources that reside in the public 

domain or have been released under an 

intellectual property license that 

permits their free use or repurposing by 

others. 

Persistently lowest-achieving schools 

means, as determined by the State: (i) 

Any Title I school in improvement, 

corrective action, or restructuring that 

(a) is among the lowest-achieving five 

percent of Title I schools in 

improvement, corrective action, or 

restructuring or the lowest-achieving 

five Title I schools in improvement, 

corrective action, or restructuring in the 

State, whichever number of schools is 

greater; or (b) is a high school that has 

had a graduation rate as defined in 34 

CFR 200.19(b) that is less than 60 

percent over a number of years; and (ii) 

any secondary school that is eligible for, 

but does not receive, Title I funds that: 

(a) Is among the lowest-achieving five 

percent of secondary schools or the 

lowest-achieving five secondary schools 

in the State that are eligible for, but do 

not receive, Title I funds, whichever 

number of schools is greater; or (b) is a 

high school that has had a graduation 

rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that 

is less than 60 percent over a number of 

years. 

To identify the persistently lowestachieving schools, a State must take into 

account both: (i) The academic 

achievement of the ‘‘all students’’ group 

in a school in terms of proficiency on 

the State’s assessments under section 

1111(b)(3) of the ESEA in reading/ 

language arts and mathematics 

combined; and (ii) the school’s lack of 

progress on those assessments over a 

number of years in the ‘‘all students’’ 

group. 

Privacy requirements means the 

requirements of the Family Educational 

Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 

U.S.C. 1232g, and its implementing 

regulations in 34 CFR part 99, the 

Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, as well as all 

applicable Federal, State and local 

requirements regarding privacy. 

Program of study means a career and 

technical education program of study, 

which may be offered as an option to 

students (and their parents as 

appropriate) when planning for and 

completing future coursework, that— 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

47290 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Notices 

(a) Incorporates secondary education 

and postsecondary education; 

(b) Includes coherent and rigorous 

content aligned with challenging 

academic standards and relevant career 

and technical content in a coordinated, 

non-duplicative progression of courses 

that align secondary education with 

postsecondary education to adequately 

prepare students to succeed in 

postsecondary education; 

(c) May include the opportunity for 

secondary education students to 

participate in dual or concurrent 

enrollment programs or other ways to 

acquire postsecondary education 

credits; and 

(d) Leads to an industry-recognized 

credential or certificate at the 

postsecondary level, or an associate or 

baccalaureate degree. 

Quasi-experimental study means an 

evaluation design that attempts to 

approximate an experimental design (as 

defined in this notice) and can support 

causal conclusions (i.e., minimizes 

threats to internal validity, such as 

selection bias, or allows them to be 

modeled). Well-designed and wellimplemented quasi-experimental 

studies include carefully matched 

comparison group designs (as defined in 

this notice), interrupted time series 

designs (as defined in this notice), or 

regression discontinuity designs (as 

defined in this notice). 

Regression discontinuity design study 

means, in part, a quasi-experimental 

study (as defined in this notice) design 

that closely approximates an 

experimental study (as defined in this 

notice). In a regression discontinuity 

design, participants are assigned to a 

treatment or comparison group based on 

a numerical rating or score of a variable 

unrelated to the treatment such as the 

rating of an application for funding. 

Another example would be assignment 

of eligible students, teachers, 

classrooms, or schools above a certain 

score (‘‘cut score’’) to the treatment 

group and assignment of those below 

the score to the comparison group. 

Strong evidence means evidence from 

previous studies whose designs can 

support causal conclusions (i.e., studies 

with high internal validity), and studies 

that in total include enough of the range 

of participants and settings to support 

scaling up to the State, regional, or 

national level (i.e., studies with high 

external validity). The following are 

examples of strong evidence: 

(1) More than one well-designed and 

well-implemented (as defined in this 

notice) experimental study (as defined 

in this notice) or well-designed and 

well-implemented (as defined in this 

notice) quasi-experimental study (as 

defined in this notice) that supports the 

effectiveness of the practice, strategy, or 

program; or 

(2) One large, well-designed and wellimplemented (as defined in this notice) 

randomized controlled, multisite trial 

that supports the effectiveness of the 

practice, strategy, or program. 

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 endof-course tests; student performance on 

English language proficiency 

assessments; and other measures of 

student achievement that are rigorous 

and comparable across schools. 

Student growth means the change in 

student achievement (as defined in this 

notice) for an individual student 

between two or more points in time. A 

State may also include other measures 

that are rigorous and comparable across 

classrooms. 

Well-designed and well-implemented 

means, with respect to an experimental 

or quasi-experimental study (as defined 

in this notice), that the study meets the 

What Works Clearinghouse evidence 

standards, with or without reservations 

(see http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ 

references/idocviewer/ 

doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid=1 and in 

particular the description of ‘‘Reasons 

for Not Meeting Standards’’ at http:// 

ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/ 

idocviewer/ 

Doc.aspx?docId=19&tocId=4#reasons). 

Final Priorities and Definitions 

We will announce the final priorities 

and definitions in a notice in the 

Federal Register. We will determine the 

final priorities and definitions after 

considering responses to this notice and 

other information available to the 

Department. This notice does not 

preclude us from proposing additional 

priorities and definitions, subject to 

meeting applicable rulemaking 

requirements. 

Note: This notice does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we choose 

to use any of these priorities and definitions, 

we invite applications through a notice in the 

Federal Register. 

Reminder of Accountability 

Requirements: We remind potential 

applicants that in reviewing 

applications in any discretionary grant 

competition, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), 

the Secretary may consider the past 

performance of the applicant in carrying 

out a previous award, such as the 

applicant’s use of funds and its 

compliance with grant conditions. The 

Secretary may also consider whether the 

applicant failed to submit a performance 

report or submitted a report of 

unacceptable quality. 

Under 34 CFR 74.14 and 80.12, the 

Secretary may impose special 

conditions on a grant if the applicant or 

grantee is not financially stable; has a 

history of unsatisfactory performance; 

has a financial or other management 

system that does not meet the standards 

in 34 CFR part 74 or 80, as applicable; 

has not fulfilled the conditions of a 

prior grant; or is otherwise not 

responsible. 

In making a continuation award, the 

Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 

75.253, the extent to which a grantee 

has made ‘‘substantial progress toward 

meeting the objectives in its approved 

application.’’ This consideration 

includes the review of a grantee’s 

progress in meeting the targets and 

projected outcomes in its approved 

application, and whether the grantee 

has expended funds in a manner that is 

consistent with its approved application 

and budget. In making a competitive 

grant award, the Secretary also requires 

various assurances and, in making a 

continuation award, considers whether 

the grantee is operating in compliance 

with its current assurances, including 

those under applicable Federal civil 

rights laws and the regulations in 34 

CFR parts 100 through 110 that prohibit 

discrimination in programs or activities 

receiving Federal financial assistance 

from the Department of Education. 

Executive Order 12866 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Secretary must determine whether a 

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. 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) 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Notices 47291 

materially alter the budgetary impacts of 

entitlement grants, user fees, or local 

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 set forth in the Executive 

order. The Secretary has determined 

that this regulatory action is significant 

under section 3(f) of the Executive 

order. 

This notice has been reviewed in 

accordance with Executive Order 12866. 

Under the terms of the order, we have 

assessed the potential costs and benefits 

of this proposed regulatory action. 

The potential costs associated with 

this proposed regulatory action are 

those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

discretionary grant programs effectively 

and efficiently. 

In assessing the potential costs and 

benefits—both quantitative and 

qualitative—of this proposed regulatory 

action, we have determined that the 

benefits of the proposed priorities and 

definitions justify the costs. 

Intergovernmental Review: Some of 

the programs affected by these proposed 

priorities 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. 

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: 

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) on the Internet at the 

following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/ 

fedregister. To use PDF you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at this site. 

Note: 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 on GPO 

Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/ 

index.html. 

Dated: July 15, 2010. 

Arne Duncan, 

Secretary of Education. 

[FR Doc. 2010–19296 Filed 8–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Notice of Baseline Filings 

July 29, 2010. 

ONEOK Gas Storage, 

L.L.C..

Docket No. PR10– 

67–000. 

Atmos Energy—Kentucky/Mid-States 

Division.

Docket No. PR10– 

68–000. 

Magic Valley Pipeline, 

L.P..

Docket No. PR10– 

69–000. 

Calpine Texas Pipeline, L.P..Docket No. PR10– 

70–000. 

(Not Consolidated). 

Take notice that on July 27, 2010, and 

July 28, 2010, respectively the 

applicants listed above submitted their 

baseline filing of its Statement of 

Operating Conditions for services 

provided under section 311 of the 

Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA). 

Any person desiring to participate in 

this rate proceeding must file a motion 

to intervene or to protest this filing must 

file in accordance with Rules 211 and 

214 of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 

and 385.214). Protests will be 

considered by the Commission in 

determining the appropriate action to be 

taken, but will not serve to make 

protestants parties to the proceeding. 

Any person wishing to become a party 

must file a notice of intervention or 

motion to intervene, as appropriate. 

Such notices, motions, or protests must 

be filed on or before the date as 

indicated below. Anyone filing an 

intervention or protest must serve a 

copy of that document on the Applicant. 

Anyone filing an intervention or protest 

on or before the intervention or protest 

date need not serve motions to intervene 

or protests on persons other than the 

Applicant. 

The Commission encourages 

electronic submission of protests and 

interventions in lieu of paper using the 

‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. 

Persons unable to file electronically 

should submit an original and 14 copies 

of the protest or intervention to the 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 

888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426. 

This filing is accessible on-line at 

http://www.ferc.gov, using the 

‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for 

review in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room in Washington, DC. 

There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the 

Web site that enables subscribers to 

receive e-mail notification when a 

document is added to a subscribed 

docket(s). For assistance with any FERC 

Online service, please e-mail 

FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or call 

(866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call 

(202) 502–8659. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern time 

on Tuesday, August 10, 2010. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–19229 Filed 8–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Combined Notice of Filings #1 

July 28, 2010. 

Take notice that the Commission 

received the following electric rate 

filings: 

Docket Numbers: ER03–534–010. 

Applicants: Ingenco Wholesale 

Power, LLC. 

Description: Errata to Notice of 

Change in Status of Ingenco Wholesale 

Power, LLC. 

Filed Date: 07/27/2010. 

Accession Number: 20100727–5118. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Tuesday, August 17, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: ER08–770–004. 

Applicants: Longview Power. 

Description: Errata to Change-inStatus Notification of Longview Power, 

LLC. 

Filed Date: 07/27/2010. 

Accession Number: 20100727–5158. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Tuesday, August 17, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: ER09–1051–004. 

Applicants: ISO New England Inc. 

Description: ISO New England et al 

submits a compliance filing to remove 

the Host Utility exceptions for demand 

response aggregators registering to 

participate in the Forward Capacity 

Market. 

Filed Date: 07/27/2010. 

Accession Number: 20100728–0205. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Tuesday, August 17, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: ER10–1105–001. 

Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric 

Company. 

Description: Pacific Gas and Electric 

Company submits its compliance filing 

to revise the Transmission Owner Tariff, 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES