Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 12955 

Dated: February 1, 2013. 

Patricia L. Toppings, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2013–03416 Filed 2–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter IV 

[Docket ID ED–2012–OVAE–0053] 

Final Requirements, Definitions, and 

Selection Criteria—Native American 

Career and Technical Education 

Program (NACTEP) 

[Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

(CFDA) Number: 84.101A.] 

AGENCY: Office of Vocational and Adult 

Education, Department of Education. 

ACTION: Final requirements, definitions, 

and selection criteria. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Vocational and Adult Education 

announces requirements, definitions, 

and selection criteria under the Native 

American Career and Technical 

Education Program (NACTEP). The 

Assistant Secretary may use these 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria for a competition in fiscal year 

(FY) 2013 and possibly in later years. 

We take this action to notify all 

interested parties and eligible applicants 

in particular, of the requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria that 

we may use in upcoming competitions 

under section 116 of the Carl D. Perkins 

Career and Technical Education Act of 

2006 (the Act). 

DATES: Effective Date: March 28, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gwen Washington, by telephone: (202) 

245–7790, or by email: 

gwen.washingon@ed.gov; or Linda 

Mayo, by telephone: (202) 245–7792, or 

by email: linda.mayo@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 

telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay 

Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose of Program: Under NACTEP, 

the Secretary provides grants, 

cooperative agreements, or enters into 

contracts with Indian tribes, tribal 

organizations, or Alaska Native entities 

to improve career and technical 

education programs that are consistent 

with the purposes of the Act and that 

benefit Native Americans and Alaska 

Natives. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 2301 et 

seq., particularly 2326(a)–(g). 

We published a notice of proposed 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria for this program in the Federal 

Register on November 20, 2012 (77 FR 

69579) (November 20, 2012 Notice), 

which contained background 

information and our reasons for 

proposing our requirements, definitions, 

and selection criteria. Except for minor 

technical changes, there are no 

differences between the proposed 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria and the final requirements, 

definitions and selection criteria. 

Public Comment: In response to our 

invitation in the November 20, 2012 

Notice, we received three comments in 

support of our proposals and one 

request for clarification of certain 

elements of our Notice. The following is 

a discussion of those comments with 

our responses. We made no changes in 

response to comments we received. 

Analysis of Comments: 

Comment: Two comments we 

received were from current NACTEP 

grantees supporting our proposed 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria. These commenters indicated 

that their current NACTEP grants had 

enabled them to serve the career and 

technical education needs of their 

Indian student populations in the face 

of high unemployment rates and great 

need for career and technical education. 

One of the commenters represented a 

reservation with an unemployment rate 

of 66 percent where most reservation 

inhabitants are living in poverty. This 

commenter indicated that its current 

NACTEP grant had had a considerable 

positive effect on the reservation and 

members of the commenters’ tribe by 

preparing the tribe’s students to fulfill 

expected local workforce needs during 

the period covered by the current grant. 

Both commenters agreed with the 

Department’s proposed approach of 

retaining programmatic elements 

developed for the first NACTEP 

competition following enactment of the 

Act for grant competitions funded with 

appropriations under this statute. 

Discussion: We agree with the 

commenters, and in this notice we 

announce as final the NACTEP 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria we proposed in our November 

20, 2012 Notice. 

Change: None. 

Comment: We received one comment 

saying that the approach of retaining 

current requirements developed 

following the 2006 reauthorization of 

the Act was one of consistency and 

strength and would provide for program 

continuity. This commenter expressed 

the view that the Department’s approach 

had worked well for NACTEP and that 

there was no need to make changes. 

The commenter also requested that 

the Department not impose a page limit 

for applications in the next competition 

so as to allow applicants the greatest 

flexibility in their applications. 

Discussion: With regard to the 

comment about our overall approach, 

we agree with the commenter, and in 

this notice we announce as final the 

NACTEP requirements, definitions, and 

selection criteria we proposed in our 

November 20, 2012 Notice. 

The commenter requested that we not 

impose application page limitations. We 

do not do so through these 

requirements, definitions, or selection 

criteria. 

Change: None. 

Comment: We received one comment 

requesting clarification of the November 

20, 2012 Notice’s ‘‘Authorized 

Programs, Services, and Activities’’ 

section, (subsection II within the 

‘‘Proposed Requirements’’ section), 

asking whether applicants would be 

required to meet all three elements 

under ‘‘Authorized programs’’ or any 

combination of those elements. Also 

with regard to ‘‘Authorized Programs, 

Services, and Activities,’’ the 

commenter asked for clarification on 

challenging academic standards in 

reading/language arts and in 

mathematics, stating that the November 

20, 2012 Notice proposed the 

integration of academics with career and 

technical education only at the 

secondary level. This commenter also 

asked where the term ‘‘special 

population’’ is defined. 

Discussion: Yes, applicants are 

required to meet all three elements 

under ‘‘Authorized programs.’’ To 

ensure consistency with the Act, in the 

‘‘Authorized Programs, Services, and 

Activities’’ section of our November 20, 

2012 Notice, we require alignment of 

NACTEP projects with other programs 

authorized under the Act, including 

requirements that recipients of Perkins 

funds provide individuals with coherent 

and rigorous content aligned with 

challenging academic standards and 

relevant technical knowledge and skills 

and improve career and technical 

education programs. Section 116(e) of 

the Act requires the Assistant Secretary 

to ensure that activities funded under 

NACTEP will improve career and 

technical education programs. And, 

section 3(5) of the Act defines the term 

‘‘career and technical education’’ as 

requiring certain elements. 

Therefore, we require that NACTEP 

programs meet all of the elements of the 

Act’s definition of ‘‘career and technical 

education.’’ In addition, we require 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
12956 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

NACTEP programs with CTE at the 

secondary level provide individuals 

with coherent and rigorous academic 

curriculum aligned with challenging 

academic content standards and student 

academic achievement standards in 

reading or language arts and in 

mathematics that the State in which the 

applicant is located has established 

under the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act of 1965, as amended (20 

U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) (ESEA). Also, 

projects must develop new programs, 

services, or activities or improve or 

expand on existing programs, services, 

or activities that are consistent with the 

purposes of the Act, and must fund, by 

which we meant support, career and 

technical education programs, services, 

or activities that are entirely new, would 

improve or expand existing career and 

technical education programs, or would 

inherently improve career and technical 

education. We provided a note to 

explain what we meant by a program, 

service or activity that ‘‘inherently 

improves’’ career and technical 

education. 

By identifying these program 

elements in detail, we intend to clearly 

identify those programmatic elements 

that NACTEP applicants would be 

required to include and address in their 

applications and in their proposed 

projects, to fully reflect NACTEP 

program requirements of section 116 

and, where appropriate, of the broader 

Act. 

As to the commenter’s second request 

for clarification, in addition to the 

elements we are requiring for all 

NACTEP-funded programs, we are 

requiring that NACTEP programs with 

CTE at the secondary level, provide 

individuals with coherent and rigorous 

academic curriculum aligned with 

challenging academic content standards 

and student academic achievement 

standards in reading or language arts 

and in mathematics that the State in 

which the applicant is located has 

established under the ESEA. 

Based on the Act’s definition of 

‘‘career and technical education,’’, we 

are requiring that all programs, 

activities, or services funded under 

NACTEP provide coherent sequences of 

courses including organized educational 

activities that include competencybased applied learning that contributes 

to the academic knowledge, higherorder reasoning and problem-solving 

skills, work attitudes, general 

employability skills, technical skills, 

and occupation-specific skills, and 

knowledge of all aspects of an industry, 

including entrepreneurship, of an 

individual. Contrary to the commenter’s 

conclusion on this point, our proposed 

requirement for competency-based 

applied learning referred broadly to 

authorized activities and included 

career and technical education activities 

at postsecondary level. 

As to the commenter’s third request 

for clarification, we did not define the 

term ‘‘special populations’’ in our 

November 20, 2012 Notice because this 

term is defined in the section 3(29) of 

the Act. As we indicated in the Notice, 

we did not intend to include in our 

November 20, 2012 Notice, nor were 

seeking public comment on, statutory 

requirements or definitions. 

Note that we changed the 

introductory paragraph in section II of 

the requirements to more accurately 

reflect the definition of ‘‘career and 

technical education’’ in section 3(5) of 

the Act. 

Change: We changed the introductory 

paragraph in section II of the 

requirements from stating we announce 

the requirements ‘‘to align NACTEP 

with other authorized programs that 

require recipients of funds under the 

Act to develop challenging academic 

standards and improve career and 

technical education’’ to specify that we 

announce the requirements ‘‘to align 

NACTEP with other authorized 

programs that require recipients of 

funds under the Act to provide coherent 

and rigorous content aligned with 

challenging academic standards and 

improve career and technical education 

programs.’’ 

Comment: None. 

Discussion: We inadvertently left out 

the word ‘‘race’’ in paragraph (e)(1) of 

the proposed selection criteria. We 

correct this omission in the final 

selection criteria. Change: With the 

addition of the word, ‘‘race,’’ paragraph 

(e)(1) now reads, ‘‘the extent to which 

the applicant encourages applications 

for employment from persons who are 

members of groups that have 

traditionally been underrepresented 

based on race, color, national origin, 

gender, age, or disability.’’ 

Final Requirements, Definitions, and 

Selection Criteria: 

Final Requirements: 

I. Demonstration of Eligibility 

(a) The Assistant Secretary for 

Vocational and Adult Education 

announces that an eligible applicant (as 

determined by the Act) must include 

documentation in its application 

showing that it and, if appropriate, its 

consortium members, are eligible to 

apply. 

(b) As defined in the Indian SelfDetermination and Education 

Assistance Act (ISDEA) (25 U.S.C. 

450b(l)), the term ‘‘tribal organization’’ 

means the recognized governing body of 

any Indian tribe; any legally established 

organization of Indians which is 

controlled, sanctioned, or chartered by 

such governing body or which is 

democratically elected by the adult 

members of the Indian community to be 

served by such organization and which 

includes the maximum participation of 

Indians in all phases of its activities: 

provided, that in any case where a 

contract is let or grant made to an 

organization to perform services 

benefiting more than one Indian tribe, 

the approval of each such Indian tribe 

shall be a prerequisite to the letting or 

making of such contract or grant. In 

accordance with this statutory 

definition, any tribal organization 

proposing to provide NACTEP services 

for the benefit of more than one Indian 

tribe must first obtain the approval of 

each Indian tribe it proposes to serve 

and must submit documentation of such 

approval with its NACTEP application 

and that documentation of tribal 

approval is a prerequisite to the 

awarding of a NACTEP grant to any 

tribal organization proposing to serve 

more than one Indian tribe. 

II. Authorized Programs, Services, and 

Activities 

Consistent with the Act, the Assistant 

Secretary for Vocational and Adult 

Education announces the following 

requirements, to align NACTEP with 

other authorized programs that require 

recipients of funds under the Act to 

provide coherent and rigorous content 

aligned with challenging academic 

standards and improve career and 

technical education programs. 

(a) Authorized programs. Section 

116(e) of the Act requires the Secretary 

to ensure that activities funded under 

NACTEP ‘‘will improve career and 

technical education programs’’ (20 

U.S.C. 2326(e)). Therefore, under 

NACTEP the Assistant Secretary will 

award grants to carry out projects that— 

(1) Propose organized educational 

activities offering a sequence of courses 

that— 

(i) Provide individuals with coherent 

and rigorous content aligned with 

challenging academic standards and 

relevant technical knowledge and skills 

needed to prepare for further education 

and careers in current or emerging 

professions; 

(ii) Provide technical skill 

proficiency, an industry-recognized 

credential, a certificate, or an associate 

degree; and 

(iii) Include competency-based 

applied learning that contributes to the 

academic knowledge, higher-order 

reasoning and problem-solving skills, 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 12957 

work attitudes, general employability 

skills, technical skills, and occupationspecific skills, and knowledge of all 

aspects of an industry, including 

entrepreneurship, of an individual. 

Projects may include prerequisite 

courses (other than remedial courses) 

that meet the definitional requirements 

of section 3(5) of the Act. (20 U.S.C. 

2302(5)) In addition, at the secondary 

level, coherent and rigorous academic 

curriculum must be aligned with 

challenging academic content standards 

and student academic achievement 

standards in reading or language arts 

and in mathematics that the State in 

which the applicant is located has 

established under the ESEA. Contacts 

for State ESEA programs may be found 

on the Internet at: www.ed.gov/about/ 

contacts/state/index.html. 

(2) Develop new programs, services, 

or activities or improve or expand 

existing programs, services, or activities 

that are consistent with the purposes of 

the Act. In other words, the Department 

will support ‘‘expansions’’ or 

‘‘improvements’’ that include, but are 

not limited to, the expansion of effective 

programs or practices; upgrading of 

activities, equipment, or materials; 

increasing staff capacity; adoption of 

new technology; modification of 

curriculum; or implementation of new 

policies to improve program 

effectiveness and outcomes. 

(3) Fund a career and technical 

education program, service, or activity 

that— 

(i) Is a new program, service, or 

activity that was not provided by the 

applicant during the instructional term 

(a defined period, such as a semester, 

trimester, or quarter, within the 

academic year) that preceded the 

request for funding under NACTEP; 

(ii) Will improve or expand an 

existing career and technical education 

program; or 

(iii) Inherently improves career and 

technical education. 

Note: A program, service, or activity 

‘‘inherently improves career and 

technical education’’ if it— 

(a) Develops new career and technical 

education programs of study that will be 

approved by the appropriate 

accreditation agency; 

(b) Strengthens the rigor of the 

academic and career and technical 

components of funded programs; 

(c) Uses curriculum that is aligned 

with industry-recognized standards and 

will result in students attaining 

industry-recognized credentials, 

certificates, or degrees; 

(d) Integrates academics (other than 

remedial courses) with career and 

technical education programs through a 

coherent sequence of courses to ensure 

learning in the core academic and career 

and technical subjects; 

(e) Links career and technical 

education at the secondary level with 

career and technical education at the 

postsecondary level and facilitates 

students’ pursuit of a baccalaureate 

degree; 

(f) Expands the scope, depth, and 

relevance of curriculum, especially 

content that provides students with a 

comprehensive understanding of all 

aspects of an industry and a variety of 

hands-on, job-specific experiences; and 

(g) Offers— 

(1) Work-related experience, 

internships, cooperative education, 

school-based enterprises, 

entrepreneurship, community service 

learning, and job shadowing that are 

related to career and technical 

education programs; 

(2) Coaching/mentoring, support 

services, and extra help for students 

after school, on weekends and/or during 

the summers, so they can meet higher 

standards; 

(3) Career guidance and academic 

counseling for students participating in 

career and technical education 

programs; 

(4) Placement services for students 

who have successfully completed career 

and technical education programs and 

attained a technical skill proficiency 

that is aligned with industry-recognized 

standards; 

(5) Professional development 

programs for teachers, counselors, and 

administrators; 

(6) Strong partnerships among 

grantees and local educational agencies, 

postsecondary institutions, community 

leaders, adult education providers, and, 

as appropriate, other entities, such as 

employers, labor organizations, parents, 

and local partnerships, to enable 

students to achieve State academic 

standards and career and technical 

skills; 

(7) The use of student assessment and 

evaluation data to improve continually 

instruction and staff development with 

the goal of increasing student 

achievement in career and technical 

education programs; or 

(8) Research, development, 

demonstration, dissemination, 

evaluation and assessment, capacitybuilding, and technical assistance, 

related to career and technical 

education programs. 

(b) Student stipends. In accordance 

with section 116(c)(2) of the Act, a 

portion of an award under this program 

may be used to provide stipends (as 

defined in the Definitions section of this 

notice) to one or more students to help 

meet the students’ costs of participation 

in a NACTEP project. A grantee must 

apply the following procedures for 

determining student eligibility for 

stipends and appropriate amounts to be 

awarded as stipends: 

(1) To be eligible for a stipend a 

student must— 

(i) Be enrolled in a career and 

technical education project funded 

under this program; 

(ii) Be in regular attendance in a 

NACTEP project and meet the training 

institution’s attendance requirement; 

(iii) Maintain satisfactory progress in 

his or her program of study according to 

the training institution’s published 

standards for satisfactory progress; and 

(iv) Have an acute economic need 

that— 

(A) Prevents participation in a project 

funded under this program without a 

stipend; and 

(B) Cannot be met through a workstudy program. 

(2) The amount of a stipend is the 

greater of either the minimum hourly 

wage prescribed by State or local law or 

the minimum hourly wage established 

under the Fair Labor Standards Act. 

(3) A grantee may only award a 

stipend if the stipend combined with 

other resources the student receives 

does not exceed the student’s financial 

need. A student’s financial need is the 

difference between the student’s cost of 

attendance and the financial aid or other 

resources available to defray the 

student’s cost of participating in a 

NACTEP project. 

(4) To calculate the amount of a 

student’s stipend, a grantee would 

multiply the number of hours a student 

actually attends career and technical 

education instruction by the amount of 

the minimum hourly wage that is 

prescribed by State or local law, or by 

the minimum hourly wage that is 

established under the Fair Labor 

Standards Act. 

Example: If a grantee uses the Fair 

Labor Standards Act minimum hourly 

wage of $7.25 and a student attends 

classes for 20 hours a week, the 

student’s stipend would be $145 for the 

week during which the student attends 

classes ($7.25 × 20 = $145.00). 

Note: In accordance with applicable 

Department statutory requirements and 

administrative regulations, grantees must 

maintain records that fully support their 

decisions to award stipends and the amounts 

that are paid, such as proof of a student’s 

enrollment in a NACTEP project, stipend 

applications, timesheets showing the number 

of attendance hours confirmed in writing by 

an instructor, student financial status 

information, and evidence that a student 

would not be able to participate in the 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
12958 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

NACTEP project without a stipend. (20 

U.S.C. 1232f; 34 CFR 75.700–75.702; 75.730; 

and 75.731) 

(5) An eligible student may receive a 

stipend when taking a course for the 

first time. However, generally a stipend 

may not be provided to a student who 

has already taken, completed, and had 

the opportunity to benefit from a course 

and is merely repeating the course. 

(6) An applicant must include in its 

application the procedure it intends to 

use to determine student eligibility for 

stipends and stipend amounts, and its 

oversight procedures for the awarding 

and payment of stipends. 

(c) Direct assistance to students. A 

grantee may provide direct assistance to 

students if the following conditions are 

met: 

(1) The recipient of the direct 

assistance is an individual who is a 

member of a special population and 

who is participating in the grantee’s 

NACTEP project. 

(2) The direct assistance is needed to 

address barriers to the individual’s 

successful participation in that project. 

(3) The direct assistance is part of a 

broader, more generally focused 

program or activity to address the needs 

of an individual who is a member of a 

special population. 

Note: Direct assistance to individuals who 

are members of special populations is not, by 

itself, a ‘‘program or activity for special 

populations.’’ 

(4) The grant funds used for direct 

assistance must be expended to 

supplement, and not supplant, 

assistance that is otherwise available 

from non-Federal sources. (20 U.S.C. 

2391(a)) For example, generally, a 

postsecondary educational institution 

could not use NACTEP funds to provide 

child care for single parents if nonFederal funds previously were made 

available for this purpose, or if nonFederal funds are used to provide child 

care services for single parents 

participating in non-career and 

technical education programs and these 

services otherwise would have been 

available to career and technical 

education students in the absence of 

NACTEP funds. 

(5) In determining how much of the 

NACTEP grant funds it will use for 

direct assistance to an eligible student, 

a grantee must consider whether the 

specific services to be provided are a 

reasonable and necessary cost of 

providing career and technical 

education programs for special 

populations. However, the Assistant 

Secretary does not envision a 

circumstance in which it would be a 

reasonable and necessary expenditure of 

NACTEP project funds for a grantee to 

use a majority of a project’s budget to 

pay direct assistance to students, in lieu 

of providing the students served by the 

project with career and technical 

education. 

III. Additional Final Requirements 

(a) Career and technical education 

agreement. Any applicant that is not 

proposing to provide career and 

technical education directly to its 

students and proposes instead to use 

NACTEP funds to pay one or more 

qualified educational entities to provide 

education to its students must include 

with its application a written career and 

technical education agreement between 

the applicant and that entity. This 

written agreement must describe the 

commitment between the applicant and 

each educational entity and must 

include, at a minimum, a statement of 

the responsibilities of the applicant and 

the entity. The agreement must be 

signed by the appropriate individuals 

on behalf of each party, such as the 

authorizing official or president of a 

tribe or tribal organization, a college 

president, or a college dean. 

(b) Evaluation Requirements. To help 

ensure the high quality of NACTEP 

projects and the achievement of the 

goals and purposes of section 116 of the 

Act, each grantee must budget for and 

conduct an ongoing evaluation of the 

effectiveness of its NACTEP project. An 

independent evaluator must conduct the 

evaluation. The evaluation must— 

(1) Be appropriate for the project and 

be both formative and summative in 

nature; 

(2) Include— 

(i) Applicable performance measures 

for NACTEP; 

(ii) Qualitative and quantitative data 

with respect to— 

(A) Academic and career and 

technical competencies demonstrated 

by the participants and the number and 

kinds of academic and work credentials 

acquired by individuals, including 

participation in programs providing 

skill proficiency assessments, industry 

certifications, or training at the associate 

degree level that is articulated with an 

advanced degree option; 

(B) Enrollment, completion, and 

placement of participants by gender for 

each occupation for which training was 

provided; 

(C) Job or work skill attainment or 

enhancement, including participation in 

apprenticeship and work-based learning 

programs, and student progress in 

achieving technical skill proficiencies 

necessary to obtain employment in the 

field for which the student has been 

prepared, including attainment or 

enhancement of technical skills in the 

industry the student is preparing to 

enter; 

(D) Activities during the formative 

stages of the project to help guide and 

improve the project, as well as a 

summative evaluation that includes 

recommendations for disseminating 

information on project activities and 

results; 

(E) The number and percentage of 

students who obtained industryrecognized credentials, certificates, or 

degrees; 

(F) If available, the outcomes of 

students’ technical assessments, by type 

and scores; and 

(G) The rates of attainment of a 

proficiency credential or certificate, in 

conjunction with a secondary school 

diploma. 

(3) Measure the effectiveness of the 

project, including— 

(i) A comparison between the 

intended and observed results; and 

(ii) A demonstration of a clear link 

between the observed results and the 

specific treatment given to project 

participants; 

(4) Measure the extent to which 

information about or resulting from the 

project was disseminated at other sites, 

such as through the grantee’s 

development and use of guides or 

manuals that provide step-by-step 

directions for practitioners to follow 

when initiating similar efforts; and 

(5) Measure the long-term impact of 

the project, such as, follow-up data on 

students’ employment, sustained 

employment, promotions, and further/ 

continuing education or training, or the 

impact the project had on tribal 

economic development or career and 

technical education activities offered by 

tribes. 

Final Definitions: 

The Assistant Secretary for Vocational 

and Adult Education announces the 

following definitions for program terms 

not defined in the Act, by crossreferences in the Act to other Federal 

statutes, or in the Education Department 

General Administrative Regulations: 

Acute economic need means an 

income that is at or below the national 

poverty level according to the latest 

available data from the U.S. Department 

of Commerce or the U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services Poverty 

Guidelines. 

Direct assistance to students means 

tuition, dependent care, transportation, 

books, and supplies that are necessary 

for a student to participate in a project 

funded under this program. 

Stipend means a subsistence 

allowance for a student that is necessary 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 12959 

for the student to participate in a project 

funded under this program. 

Final Selection Criteria: 

The Assistant Secretary for Vocational 

and Adult Education announces the 

following selection criteria for 

evaluating an application under this 

program. We may apply one or more of 

these criteria in any year in which this 

program is in effect. We will announce 

the maximum possible points assigned 

to each criterion in the notice inviting 

applications, in the application package, 

or both. 

(a) Need for project. In determining 

the need for the proposed project, we 

consider the extent of the need for the 

services to be provided or the activities 

to be carried out by the proposed 

project, as evidenced by data on such 

phenomena as local labor market 

demand or occupational trends, or from 

surveys, recommendations from 

accrediting agencies, or tribal economic 

development plans. 

(b) Significance. In determining the 

significance of the proposed project, we 

consider the following factors: 

(1) The potential contribution of the 

proposed project toward increasing the 

understanding of educational needs, 

issues, or strategies for providing career 

and technical education to American 

Indians and Alaska Natives. 

(2) The likelihood that the proposed 

project will result in system change or 

improvement in the applicant’s 

educational program as evidenced by 

the types of training and activities 

identified in the project application. 

(3) The extent to which the proposed 

project is likely to build local capacity 

to provide, improve, or expand services 

that address the career and technical 

needs of the target population. 

(c) Quality of the project design. In 

determining the quality of the design of 

the proposed project, we consider the 

following factors: 

(1) The extent to which goals, 

objectives, and outcomes are clearly 

specified and measurable (e.g., 

identification of the requirements for 

each course of study to be provided 

under the project, the technical skill 

proficiencies to be taught and the 

industry-recognized standards or 

competency assessments to be used, 

including related training areas and a 

description of the industry 

certifications, credentials, certificates, or 

degrees that students may earn; 

expected enrollments, completions, and 

student placements in jobs, military 

specialties, and continuing education/ 

training opportunities in each career 

training area; the number of teachers, 

counselors, and administrators to be 

trained). 

(2) The extent to which the design of 

the proposed project is appropriate to, 

and will successfully address, the needs 

of the target population or other 

identified needs, as evidenced by the 

applicant’s description of programs and 

activities that align with the target 

population’s needs. 

(3) The extent to which the design for 

implementing and evaluating the 

proposed project plans for and is likely 

to result in the development of 

information that will guide possible 

dissemination of information on project 

practices, activities, or strategies, 

including information about the 

effectiveness of the approach or 

strategies employed by the project, 

planned dissemination activities, the 

kind of practices, activities, or strategies 

to be disseminated, the target audience 

for the dissemination of such practices, 

activities, or strategies, and the 

proposed uses for such disseminated 

practices, activities, or strategies. 

(4) The extent to which the proposed 

project will establish linkages with or 

will be coordinated with similar or 

related efforts, and with community, 

State, or Federal resources, where such 

opportunities and resources exist. 

(d) Quality of project services. In 

determining the quality of the services 

to be provided by the proposed project, 

we consider the following factors: 

(1) The extent to which the training or 

professional development services to be 

provided by the proposed project would 

be of sufficient quality, intensity, and 

duration to lead to improvements in 

practice among the project staff and 

instructors, including the extent to 

which the proposed training and 

professional development plans address 

ways in which learning gaps will be 

addressed and how continuous review 

of performance will be conducted to 

identify training needs. 

(2) The extent to which the services 

to be provided by the proposed project 

will create opportunities for students to 

receive an industry-recognized 

credential; become employed in highskill, high-wage, and high-demand 

occupations; or both. 

(3) The extent to which the services 

proposed in the project will create 

opportunities for students to acquire 

technical skill proficiencies, industry 

certifications, or the skills identified by 

State or industry-recognized career and 

technical education programs or 

professions. In describing the services, 

there must be a clear link between the 

services and the skill proficiencies, 

industry certifications, credentials, 

certificates, or degrees that students may 

earn. 

(e) Quality of project personnel. In 

determining the quality of project 

personnel, we consider the following 

factors: 

(1) The extent to which the applicant 

encourages applications for employment 

from persons who are members of 

groups that have traditionally been 

underrepresented based on race, color, 

national origin, gender, age, or 

disability. 

(2) The qualifications, including 

relevant training, expertise, and 

experience, of the project director, key 

personnel, and project consultants. 

(3) The extent to which the project 

will use instructors who are certified to 

teach in the field in which they will 

provide instruction. 

(f) Adequacy of resources. In 

determining the adequacy of resources 

for the proposed project, we consider 

the following factors: 

(1) The adequacy of support, 

including facilities, equipment, 

supplies, and other resources, from the 

applicant organization(s) and the tribal 

entity or entities to be served. 

(2) The extent to which the budget is 

adequate and costs are reasonable in 

relation to the objectives of the 

proposed project. 

(3) The relevance and demonstrated 

commitment (e.g., through written 

career and technical education 

agreements, memoranda of 

understanding, letters of support and 

commitment, or commitments to 

employ project participants, as 

appropriate) of the applicant, members 

of the consortium, local employers, or 

tribal entities to be served by the 

project. 

(4) The potential for continued 

support of the project after Federal 

funding ends. 

(g) Quality of the management plan. 

In determining the quality of the 

management plan for the proposed 

project, we consider the following 

factors: 

(1) The adequacy of the management 

plan to achieve the objectives of the 

proposed project on time and within 

budget, including clearly defined 

responsibilities, timelines, and the 

milestones and performance standards 

for accomplishing project tasks. 

(2) The extent to which the time 

commitments of the project director and 

other key project personnel are 

appropriate and adequate to meet the 

objectives of the proposed project. 

(3) The adequacy of mechanisms for 

ensuring high-quality products and 

services from the proposed project. 

(h) Quality of the project evaluation. 

In determining the quality of the 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
12960 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

evaluation, we consider the following 

factors: 

(1) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation proposed by the grantee 

are thorough, feasible, and appropriate 

to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of 

the proposed project. 

(2) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation include the use of 

objective performance measures that are 

clearly related to the intended outcomes 

of the project and the Government 

Performance and Results Act of 1993 

(GPRA) performance measures, and will 

produce quantitative and qualitative 

data, to the extent possible. 

(3) The extent to which the methods 

of the evaluation include processes that 

consider the validity and integrity of 

data collection and analysis; 

accessibility of appropriate and timely 

data; accurate descriptions of 

performance; collection processes that 

yield unbiased, unprejudiced, and 

impartial data results; and the extent to 

which representation of the data clearly 

communicates an accurate picture of 

performance. 

(4) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation will provide performance 

feedback and continuous improvement 

toward achieving intended outcomes. 

(5) The quality of the evaluation to be 

conducted by an external evaluator with 

the necessary background and technical 

expertise to carry out the evaluation. 

Additional Selection Factors 

In accordance with the requirement in 

section 116(e) of the Act, we have 

included the following additional 

selection factors and will award 

additional points to any application 

addressing the following factors, as 

indicated. 

We will award— 

(a) Up to 10 additional points to 

applications that propose exemplary 

approaches that involve, coordinate 

with, or encourage tribal economic 

development plans; and 

(b) Five points to applications from 

tribally controlled colleges or 

universities that— 

(1) Are accredited or are candidates 

for accreditation by a nationally 

recognized accreditation organization as 

an institution of postsecondary career 

and technical education; or 

(2) Operate career and technical 

education programs that are accredited 

or are candidates for accreditation by a 

nationally recognized accreditation 

organization and issue certificates for 

completion of career and technical 

education programs (20 U.S.C. 2326(e)). 

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 requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria, we invite 

applications through a notice in the Federal 

Register. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

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 final 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 final 

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 

upon 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 issuing these final 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria only on a reasoned 

determination that their benefits would 

justify their 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 this regulatory action is 

consistent with the principles in 

Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action does not unduly 

interfere with tribal governments in the 

exercise of their governmental 

functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, both 

quantitative and qualitative, of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

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

print, audiotape, or compact disc) on 

request to the contact persons 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 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 12961 

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: February 21, 2013. 

Brenda Dann-Messier, 

Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult 

Education. 

[FR Doc. 2013–04424 Filed 2–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0943, FRL–9784–6] 

Findings of Failure To Submit a 

Complete State Implementation Plan 

for Section 110(a) Pertaining to the 

2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is finding that seven 

states have not made complete state 

implementation plan (SIP) submissions 

to address certain SIP elements, as 

required by the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

Specifically, the EPA is determining 

that these seven states have not 

submitted complete SIPs that provide 

the basic CAA program elements 

necessary to implement the 2008 lead 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS). The EPA refers to these SIP 

submissions as ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs. Of 

the seven states, three are incomplete 

only due to prevention of significant 

deterioration (PSD)-related elements, for 

which a federal implementation plan 

(FIP) is in place. The remaining 43 

states have made complete submissions. 

Each finding of failure to submit 

establishes a 24-month deadline for the 

EPA to promulgate FIPs to address the 

outstanding SIP elements unless prior to 

the EPA promulgating a FIP an affected 

state submits, and the EPA approves, a 

SIP that corrects the deficiency. 

DATES: The effective date of this rule is 

March 28, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

General questions concerning this 

notice should be addressed to Ms. Mia 

South: telephone (919) 541–5550, email 

south.mia@epa.gov; or Mr. Larry 

Wallace: telephone (919) 541–0906, 

email wallace.larry@epa.gov, Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air 

Quality Policy Division, Mail Code 

C504–2, 109 TW Alexander Drive, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

553 of the Administrative Procedures 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), provides that, 

when an agency for good cause finds 

that notice and public procedure are 

impracticable, unnecessary or contrary 

to the public interest, the agency may 

issue a rule without providing notice 

and an opportunity for public comment. 

The EPA has determined that there is 

good cause for making this rule final 

without prior proposal and opportunity 

for comment because no significant EPA 

judgment is involved in making a 

finding of failure to submit SIPs, or 

elements of SIPs, required by the CAA, 

where states have made no submissions, 

or incomplete submissions, to meet the 

requirement. Thus, notice and public 

procedure are unnecessary. The EPA 

finds that this constitutes good cause 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). 

For questions related to specific states 

mentioned in this notice, please contact 

the appropriate EPA Regional Office: 

Regional offices States 

EPA Region I: Dave Conroy, Air Program Branch Manager, Air Programs Branch, EPA New England, 1 Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02203–2211.Massachusetts and Vermont. 

EPA Region II: Richard Ruvo, Acting Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region II, 290 Broadway, 21st Floor, 

New York, NY 10007–1866.

New Jersey. 

EPA Region III: Cristina Fernandez, Air Program Manager, Air Quality Planning Branch, EPA Region III, 

1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103–2187.

Maryland and Pennsylvania. 

EPA Region V: John Mooney, Air Program Branch Manager, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region V, 77 West 

Jackson Street, Chicago, IL 60604.

Illinois. 

EPA Region VI: Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section, EPA Region VI, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 

75202–2733.

Oklahoma. 

EPA Region VIII: Monica Morales, Air Program Manger, Air Quality Planning Unit, EPA Region VIII Air Program, 1595 Wynkoop St. (8P–AR), Denver, CO 80202–1129.Colorado and South Dakota. 

EPA Region IX: Doris Lo, Acting Air Program Manager, Air Planning Office, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

Hawaii. 

EPA Region X: Debra Suzuki, Air Program Manager, Air Planning Unit, EPA Region X, Office of Air, Waste, 

and Toxics, Mail Code AWT–107, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.

Oregon and Washington. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background and Overview 

II. Findings of Failure to Submit for States 

That Failed to Make an Infrastructure SIP 

Submittal in Whole or in Part for the 

2008 Lead NAAQS 

A. Findings of Failure To Submit for States 

That Failed To Make a Submittal 

B. Findings of Failure To Submit Specific 

Elements of Section 110(a)(2) 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Executive Order 13563: 

Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

to Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority and Low Income Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

L. Judicial Review 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES