46396 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

estimate the total cost of the proposed 

AD to U.S. operators to be $190,840. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in subtitle VII, 

part A, subpart III, section 44701, 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This proposed AD would not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the proposed AD: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Would not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD. You may get a copy 

of this summary at the address listed 

under ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Under the authority delegated to me 

by the Administrator, the Federal 

Aviation Administration proposes to 

amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive: 

General Electric Company (GE): Docket No. 

FAA–2009–0502; Directorate Identifier 

2009–NE–02–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) must receive comments on this 

airworthiness directive (AD) action by 

November 9, 2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to GE CJ610 series 

turbojet and CF700 series turbofan engines 

with AFT Technologies combustion liner, 

part number (P/N) AFT–5016T30G02, 

installed. These engines are installed on, but 

not limited to, Learjet Inc. model 24 series 

and model 25 series airplanes, Dassault 

Aviation Fan Jet Falcon series airplanes, and 

Sabreliner Corporation NA–265–70 and NA– 

265–80 series airplanes. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from a report of an AFT 

Technologies combustion liner that released 

a large section of the inner combustion liner 

and reports of six combustion liners with 

premature cracks. We are proposing this AD 

to prevent premature cracks in the 

combustion liner, which could release pieces 

of the inner combustion liner. A release of 

pieces of the inner combustion liner could 

cause an uncontained failure of the engine 

turbine and damage to the airplane. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Replacement of AFT Technologies 

Combustion Liner P/N AFT–5016T30G02 

(f) For engines that have an AFT 

Technologies combustion liner, P/N AFT– 

5016T30G02, with fewer than 200 hourssince-new (HSN) or 300 cycles-since-new 

(CSN), remove the AFT Technologies 

combustion liner, P/N AFT–5016T30G02, 

before exceeding 200 HSN or 300 CSN, 

whichever occurs first. 

(g) For engines that have an AFT 

Technologies combustion liner, P/N AFT– 

5016T30G02, with 200 HSN or more or 300 

CSN or more, remove the AFT Technologies 

combustion liner, P/N AFT–5016T30G02, 

within 15 hours-in-service or 10 cycles-inservice, after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs first. 

(h) After the effective date of this AD, don’t 

install any AFT Technologies combustion 

liner, P/N AFT–5016T30G02, in any engine. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(i) The Manager, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office, has the authority to 

approve alternative methods of compliance 

for this AD if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(j) Contact Norman Perenson, Aerospace 

Engineer, New York Aircraft Certification 

Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 

1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, 

NY 11590; e-mail: 

norman.perenson@faa.gov; telephone (516) 

228–7337; fax (516) 794–5531, for more 

information about this AD. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

September 2, 2009. 

Peter A. White, 

Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–21629 Filed 9–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

21 CFR Part 1301 

[Docket no. DEA–321a] 

RIN 1117–AB22 

Identification of Institution-based 

Individual Practitioners 

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement 

Administration (DEA), Justice. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Drug Enforcement 

Administration (DEA) is soliciting 

public comments on how best to 

standardize the specific internal code 

number associated with each individual 

practitioner permitted by the hospital or 

other institutional practitioner to 

administer, dispense, or prescribe 

controlled substances using that 

institution’s DEA registration. DEA is 

taking this action in response to 

comments it received to its Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking regarding 

electronic prescriptions for controlled 

substances. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

postmarked and electronic comments 

must be submitted on or before 

November 9, 2009. Commenters should 

be aware that the electronic Federal 

Docket Management System will not 

accept comments after Midnight Eastern 

Time on the last day of the comment 

period. 

ADDRESSES: To ensure proper handling 

of comments, please reference ‘‘Docket 

No. DEA–321’’ on all written and 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 46397 

electronic correspondence. Written 

comments being sent via regular or 

express mail should be sent to the Drug 

Enforcement Administration, Attention: 

DEA Federal Register Representative/ 

ODL, 8701 Morrissette Drive, 

Springfield, VA 22152. Comments may 

be sent to DEA by sending an electronic 

message to 

dea.diversion.policy@usdoj.gov. 

Comments may also be sent 

electronically through http:// 

www.regulations.gov using the 

electronic comment form provided on 

that site. An electronic copy of this 

document is also available at the 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site. 

DEA will accept attachments to 

electronic comments in Microsoft Word, 

WordPerfect, Adobe PDF, or Excel file 

formats only. DEA will not accept any 

file formats other than those specifically 

listed here. 

Please note that DEA is requesting 

that electronic comments be submitted 

before midnight Eastern time on the day 

the comment period closes because 

http://www.regulations.gov terminates 

the public’s ability to submit comments 

at midnight Eastern time on the day the 

comment period closes. Commenters in 

time zones other than Eastern Time may 

want to consider this so that their 

electronic comments are received. All 

comments sent via regular or express 

mail will be considered timely if 

postmarked on the day the comment 

period closes. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark W. Caverly, Chief, Liaison and 

Policy Section, Office of Diversion 

Control, Drug Enforcement 

Administration, 8701 Morrissette Drive, 

Springfield, VA 22152; telephone: (202) 

307–7297. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Posting of Public Comments: Please 

note that all comments received are 

considered part of the public record and 

made available for public inspection 

online at http://www.regulations.gov 

and in the Drug Enforcement 

Administration’s public docket. Such 

information includes personal 

identifying information (such as your 

name, address, etc.) voluntarily 

submitted by the commenter. 

If you want to submit personal 

identifying information (such as your 

name, address, etc.) as part of your 

comment, but do not want it to be 

posted online or made available in the 

public docket, you must include the 

phrase ‘‘PERSONAL IDENTIFYING 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also place 

all the personal identifying information 

you do not want posted online or made 

available in the public docket in the first 

paragraph of your comment and identify 

what information you want redacted. 

If you want to submit confidential 

business information as part of your 

comment, but do not want it to be 

posted online or made available in the 

public docket, you must include the 

phrase ‘‘CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also 

prominently identify confidential 

business information to be redacted 

within the comment. If a comment has 

so much confidential business 

information that it cannot be effectively 

redacted, all or part of that comment 

may not be posted online or made 

available in the public docket. 

Personal identifying information and 

confidential business information 

identified and located as set forth above 

will be redacted and the comment, in 

redacted form, will be posted online and 

placed in the Drug Enforcement 

Administration’s public docket file. 

Please note that the Freedom of 

Information Act applies to all comments 

received. If you wish to inspect the 

agency’s public docket file in person by 

appointment, please see the ‘‘For 

Further Information’’ paragraph. 

DEA’s Legal Authority 

DEA implements and enforces the 

Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention 

and Control Act of 1970, often referred 

to as the Controlled Substances Act 

(CSA) and the Controlled Substances 

Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 801– 

971), (CSA), as amended. DEA publishes 

the implementing regulations for these 

statutes in Title 21 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 1300 to 

end. These regulations are designed to 

ensure that there is a sufficient supply 

of controlled substances for medical, 

scientific, and other legitimate purposes 

and to deter the diversion of controlled 

substances to illegal purposes. 

Controlled substances are drugs that 

have a potential for abuse and 

psychological and physical dependence; 

these include substances classified as 

opioids, stimulants, depressants, 

hallucinogens, anabolic steroids, and 

drugs that are immediate precursors of 

these classes of substances. DEA lists 

controlled substances in 21 CFR part 

1308. The substances are divided into 

five schedules: Schedule I substances 

have a high potential for abuse and have 

no accepted medical use in treatment in 

the United States. These substances may 

only be used for research, chemical 

analysis, or manufacture of other drugs. 

Schedule II—V substances have an 

accepted medical use and also have a 

potential for abuse and psychological 

and physical dependence. 

The CSA mandates that DEA establish 

a closed system of control for 

manufacturing, distribution, and 

dispensing of controlled substances. 

Any person who manufactures, 

distributes, dispenses, imports, exports, 

or conducts research or chemical 

analysis with controlled substances 

must register with DEA (unless exempt), 

keep track of all stocks of controlled 

substances, and maintain records to 

account for all controlled substances 

received, distributed, dispensed, or 

otherwise disposed of. 

Background 

The CSA requires that every person 

who dispenses controlled substances 

shall obtain from the Attorney General 

a registration (21 U.S.C. 822(a)(2)). 

Authority to issue such registrations has 

been delegated by the Attorney General 

to the Administrator of the Drug 

Enforcement Administration (28 CFR 

0.100). 

An individual practitioner who is an 

agent or employee of a hospital or other 

institution registered with DEA may use 

the DEA registration of that hospital or 

other institution to administer, 

dispense, or prescribe controlled 

substances in accordance with the 

regulations (21 CFR 1301.22(c)). 

Specifically: 

An individual practitioner who is an agent 

or employee of a hospital or other institution 

may, when acting in the normal course of 

business or employment, administer, 

dispense, or prescribe controlled substances 

under the registration of the hospital or other 

institution which is registered in lieu of 

being registered him/herself, provided that: 

(1) Such dispensing, administering or 

prescribing is done in the usual course of his/ 

her professional practice; 

(2) Such individual practitioner is 

authorized or permitted to do so by the 

jurisdiction in which he/she is practicing; 

(3) The hospital or other institution by 

whom he/she is employed has verified that 

the individual practitioner is so permitted to 

dispense, administer, or prescribe drugs 

within the jurisdiction; 

(4) Such individual practitioner is acting 

only within the scope of his/her employment 

in the hospital or institution; 

(5) The hospital or other institution 

authorizes the individual practitioner to 

administer, dispense or prescribe under the 

hospital registration and designates a specific 

internal code number for each individual 

practitioner so authorized. The code number 

shall consist of numbers, letters, or a 

combination thereof and shall be a suffix to 

the institution’s DEA registration number, 

preceded by a hyphen (e.g., APO123456–10 

or APO123456–A12); and 

(6) A current list of internal codes and the 

corresponding individual practitioners is 

kept by the hospital or other institution and 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
46398 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

is made available at all times to other 

registrants and law enforcement agencies 

upon request for the purpose of verifying the 

authority of the prescribing individual 

practitioner. (21 CFR 1301.22(c)) 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

Regarding Electronic Prescriptions for 

Controlled Substances 

On June 27, 2008, DEA published a 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

‘‘Electronic Prescriptions for Controlled 

Substances’’ [Docket No. DEA–218, RIN 

1117–AA61] (73 FR 36722). In that rule, 

DEA proposed that pharmacy 

applications receiving electronic 

prescriptions for controlled substances 

be capable of reading and retaining the 

full DEA registration number, including 

any extensions, or other identification 

numbers used under 21 CFR 1306.05(c). 

DEA further proposed that the full 

number including extensions must be 

retained in the prescription record. DEA 

further proposed that the pharmacy 

application must verify that the 

practitioner’s DEA registration was valid 

at the time the prescription was signed. 

DEA indicated the pharmacy 

application may do this by checking the 

DEA CSA database or by having another 

entity check the DEA CSA database 

during transmission and indicate on the 

record that the check has occurred and 

the registration is valid. Finally, DEA 

proposed that the pharmacy application 

must reject prescriptions that were 

signed by practitioners without valid 

DEA registrations. 

Comments received. DEA received 

numerous comments to its Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking regarding this 

issue. Approximately twenty 

commenters representing State licensing 

boards, pharmacy and pharmacist 

organizations, chain drug stores, and 

electronic prescription and electronic 

pharmacy application vendors 

commented regarding this issue. One 

commenter, an organization 

representing health system pharmacists, 

believed that whatever system is used 

for extensions, the system must allow 

pharmacies to validate the original DEA 

number and determine whether the DEA 

number belongs to a facility for which 

extensions are permissible. A standards 

development organization for electronic 

prescription applications asked DEA to 

propose an industry solution to 

extensions, such as a standard length. It 

noted that the same problem exists for 

paper prescriptions. 

A commenter representing grocery 

stores with pharmacies stated that DEA 

is placing the pharmacy in an untenable 

situation. The pharmacy would be 

expected to check and store a number 

on DEA’s behalf for which there is no 

standard and over which DEA exerts no 

jurisdiction, as DEA does not specify 

criteria regarding the format or content 

of the suffix data for each individual 

practitioner using the institutional 

practitioner’s registration. The 

commenter noted that the health-system 

or hospital choosing to employ a suffix 

system is tasked with the 

implementation and tracking of that 

process. The commenter recommended 

that DEA require the validity of the 

health-system DEA number be verified 

and that a health-system’s use of a suffix 

system be guided by DEA directly at 

that user’s facility. 

Various State and national pharmacy 

organizations, an association 

representing chain drug stores, several 

State boards of pharmacy, several chain 

drug stores, and several pharmacy 

system providers all stated that DEA 

should standardize extensions and make 

it clear that pharmacies are not 

responsible for checking the validity of 

the extensions. 

In response to the comments received, 

DEA is considering how best to 

standardize the internal code numbers 

assigned by institutional practitioners to 

the individual practitioners they permit 

to use their registration to administer, 

dispense, and prescribe controlled 

substances. DEA believes such 

standardization would benefit the 

overall dispensing of controlled 

substances by bringing a level of 

uniformity to such extensions. As 

commenters noted, this standardization 

is essential for DEA to require pharmacy 

systems to retain this information. 

DEA recognizes, however, that there 

are many institutional practitioners 

employing internal code number 

systems. There has never been 

standardization regarding this number, 

and DEA believes it extremely likely 

that institutional practitioner registrants 

have established a variety of internal 

code number systems. Therefore, to 

address this issue, DEA is soliciting 

information from the regulated industry 

and other interested members of the 

public regarding current methods being 

used and how best to implement 

industry standardization in this area. 

Specifically, DEA seeks the following 

information: 

• Information regarding formats used 

by institutional practitioners when 

establishing internal code numbers for 

individual practitioners permitted to 

use the institution’s registration 

number; 

• Estimates of the number of 

individual practitioners using internal 

code numbers for identification 

purposes; 

• Estimates of the number of 

individual practitioners using internal 

code numbers for identification 

purposes in a particular institutional 

practitioner; 

• Estimates of costs to institutional 

practitioners if code numbers for 

individual practitioners were to be 

standardized and what changes would 

be associated with those costs; 

• Formats pharmacy applications 

could accommodate or would prefer, 

recognizing that pharmacy applications 

may need to be reprogrammed to accept 

this information; 

• Estimates of the costs to pharmacies 

and/or pharmacy application providers 

for such reprogramming; 

• Comments regarding whether 

pharmacies have had difficulty 

obtaining information from institutional 

practitioners regarding individual 

practitioners’ internal code numbers 

and, if so, any proposed solutions. 

Commenters wishing to address the 

above topics or provide other 

information should see the ‘‘Dates,’’ 

‘‘Addresses,’’ and ‘‘Posting of public 

comments’’ sections above for 

information regarding public comment 

procedures. 

Regulatory Certifications 

This action is an Advance Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM). 

Accordingly, the requirement of 

Executive Order 12866 to assess the 

costs and benefits of this action does not 

apply. Rather, among the purposes DEA 

has in publishing this ANPRM is to seek 

information from the public regarding 

the standardization of internal code 

numbers used by institutional 

practitioners to identify individual 

practitioners who use the institution’s 

DEA registration to administer, 

dispense, or prescribe controlled 

substances. Similarly, the requirements 

of section 603 of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act do not apply to this 

action since, at this stage, it is an 

ANPRM and not a ‘‘rule’’ as defined in 

section 601 of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act. Following review of the comments 

received to this ANPRM, if DEA 

promulgates a Notice or Notices of 

Proposed Rulemaking regarding this 

issue, DEA will conduct all analyses 

required by the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, Executive Order 12866, and any 

other statutes or Executive Orders 

relevant to those rules and in effect at 

the time of promulgation. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 46399 

Dated: August 28, 2009. 

Joseph T. Rannazzisi, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Diversion Control. 

[FR Doc. E9–21698 Filed 9–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter VI 

Office of Postsecondary Education; 

Notice of Negotiated Rulemaking for 

Programs Authorized Under Title IV of 

the Higher Education Act of 1965, as 

Amended 

AGENCY: Department of Education. 

ACTION: Notice of establishment of 

negotiated rulemaking committees. 

SUMMARY: We announce our intention to 

establish two negotiated rulemaking 

committees to prepare proposed 

regulations under Title IV of the Higher 

Education Act of 1965, as amended 

(HEA). Each committee will include 

representatives of organizations or 

groups with interests that are 

significantly affected by the subject 

matter of the proposed regulations. We 

request nominations for individual 

negotiators who represent key 

stakeholder constituencies that are 

involved in the student financial 

assistance programs authorized under 

Title IV of the HEA to serve on these 

committees. 

DATES: We must receive your 

nominations for negotiators to serve on 

the committees on or before September 

25, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Please send your 

nominations for negotiators to Patty 

Chase, U.S. Department of Education, 

1990 K Street, NW., room 8034, 

Washington, DC 20006, or by fax at 

(202) 502–7874. You may also e-mail 

your nominations to 

Patty.Chase@ed.gov. Nominees will be 

notified whether or not they have been 

selected as negotiators, as soon as the 

Department’s review process is 

completed. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about the content of this 

notice, including information about the 

negotiated rulemaking process or the 

nomination submission process contact: 

Wendy Macias, U.S. Department of 

Education, 1990 K Street, NW., room 

8017, Washington, DC 20006. 

Telephone: (202) 502–7526. You may 

also e-mail your questions about the 

nomination submission process to: 

Wendy.Macias@ed.gov. 

Note: For general information about the 

negotiated rulemaking process, see The 

Negotiated Rulemaking Process for Title IV 

Regulations, Frequently Asked Questions at 

http://www.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/ 

hearulemaking/hea08/neg-reg-faq.html. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), call the 

Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free at 

1–800–877–8339. 

Individuals with disabilities can 

obtain this document in an accessible 

format (e.g., braille, large print, 

audiotape, or computer diskette) by 

contacting the contact person under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 

26, 2009, we published a notice in the 

Federal Register (74 FR 24728) 

announcing our intent to establish 

negotiated rulemaking committees to 

develop proposed regulations (1) 

governing foreign schools, including the 

implementation of the changes made to 

the HEA by the Higher Education 

Opportunity Act of 2008 (HEOA), Public 

Law 110–315, that affect foreign 

schools; and (2) to maintain or improve 

program integrity in the Title IV, HEA 

programs. We announced our intent to 

develop these proposed regulations by 

following the negotiated rulemaking 

procedures in section 492 of the HEA. 

The notice also announced a series of 

three regional hearings at which 

interested parties could comment on the 

topics suggested by the Department, and 

suggest additional topics for 

consideration for action by the 

negotiating committees. We invited 

parties to comment and submit topics 

for consideration in writing, as well. We 

heard testimony and received written 

comments from approximately 290 

individuals. Transcripts from the 

hearings and copies of the written 

comments can be found at http:// 

www.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/ 

hearulemaking/2009/negregsummerfall.html. 

Regulatory Issues: After consideration 

of the information received at the 

regional hearings and in writing, we 

have decided to establish the following 

two negotiating committees: 

• Team I—Program Integrity Issues 

• Team II—Foreign School Issues 

We received many comments 

suggesting that we negotiate issues 

related to the student loan programs 

authorized under Title IV of the HEA. 

As we anticipate the need to convene a 

negotiated rulemaking committee 

following the completion of pending 

legislative action related to student 

loans, we will not be including student 

loan issues on the agenda at this time. 

Many of those who testified and those 

who provided written comments made 

the case for changes to bankruptcy rules 

as they relate to student loans; some 

also called for changes in statutes of 

limitations and loan refinancing rules. 

While those issues are important, 

addressing them would require action 

by Congress. 

We also received comments 

suggesting revisions to the institutional 

financial responsibility regulations for 

Title IV, HEA institutional eligibility. 

We agree that this is an area where 

changes may be beneficial. However, 

significant analysis must be done by the 

Department before we can bring this 

issue to a committee for negotiation. We 

will be beginning this process in the 

near future. More information about the 

public aspects of this process will be 

forthcoming on the Department’s Web 

site. 

We list the topics each committee is 

likely to address during this round of 

negotiations elsewhere in this notice 

under Committee Topics. 

We intend to select negotiators for the 

committees that represent the interests 

significantly affected by the topics 

proposed for negotiations. In so doing, 

we will follow the requirement in 

section 492(b)(1) of the HEA that the 

individuals selected must have 

demonstrated expertise or experience in 

the relevant subjects under negotiation. 

We will also select individual 

negotiators who reflect the diversity 

among program participants, in 

accordance with section 492(b)(1) of the 

HEA. Our goal is to establish 

committees that will allow significantly 

affected parties to be represented while 

keeping the committee size manageable. 

The committees may create subgroups 

on particular topics that would involve 

additional individuals who are not 

members of the committees. Individuals 

who are not selected as members of the 

committees will be able to attend the 

meetings, have access to the individuals 

representing their constituencies, and 

participate in informal working groups 

on various issues between the meetings. 

The committee meetings will be open to 

the public. 

The Department has identified the 

following constituencies as having 

interests that are significantly affected 

by the topics proposed for negotiations. 

The Department plans to seat as 

negotiators individuals from 

organizations or groups representing 

each of these constituencies. The 

Department anticipates that individuals 

from organizations or groups 

representing each of these 

constituencies will participate as 

members of one or more committees as 

appropriate. These constituencies are: 

• Students. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS