16668 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 63 / Friday, April 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Subtitle B, Chapter II 

[Docket ID ED–2010–OESE–0005] 

RIN 1810–AB10 

Race to the Top Fund 

ACTION: Interim final requirements; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Secretary of 

Education (Secretary) amends the final 

requirements for the Race to the Top 

Fund to incorporate and make binding 

for Phase 2 of the competition State 

budget guidance. 

DATES: These requirements are effective 

April 2, 2010. We must receive your 

comments by May 3, 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 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 interim final 

requirements, address them to James 

Butler, U.S. Department of Education, 

400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 

3E108, 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: 

James Butler, Telephone: 202–205–3775 

or by e-mail: racetothetop@ed.gov. 

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) on 

request to the contact person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Invitation To Comment 

We invite you to submit comments 

regarding these interim final 

requirements and 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 interim final requirements. 

During and after the comment period 

you may inspect all public comments 

about these interim final requirements 

by accessing Regulations.gov. You may 

also inspect the comments, in person, in 

room 3W100, 400 Maryland Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC between the hours 

of 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Washington, DC 

time, Monday through Friday of each 

week except Federal holidays. 

Assistance to Individuals With 

Disabilities in Reviewing the 

Rulemaking Record: On request, we will 

provide an appropriate accommodation 

or auxiliary aid to an individual with a 

disability who needs assistance to 

review the comments or other 

documents in the public rulemaking 

record for this notice. If you want to 

schedule an appointment for this type of 

accommodation or auxiliary aid, please 

contact the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Background: The Secretary published 

final requirements for the Race to the 

Top Fund in the Federal Register on 

November 18, 2009 (74 FR 59688). In 

the same issue of the Federal Register, 

the Secretary also published the Race to 

the Top Fund NIA for Fiscal Year (FY) 

2010 (74 FR 59836). The NIA provides 

two application deadlines for the FY 

2010 Race to the Top Fund competition: 

Phase 1, due January 19, 2010, and 

Phase 2, due June 1, 2010. 

Through Race to the Top, the 

Department seeks to spur reform of the 

country’s education system. This 

mission can be met by achieving two 

key goals. First, we seek to ensure that 

States that put forth the highest-quality 

reform plans and demonstrate the 

capacity to implement those plans have 

sufficient funding to make their plans a 

reality. Second, we seek to recognize a 

number of States that can serve as 

models of change through their Race to 

the Top plans. Funding for Race to the 

Top is not unlimited. For this reason, 

the Department must balance these 

competing goals to maximize the Race 

to the Top investment while ensuring 

that the highest-quality plans can be 

implemented. 

In an effort to achieve these goals, in 

the NIA, the Department provided 

direction and flexibility to States in 

planning their budgets. Specifically, the 

NIA contained nonbinding budget 

ranges for each State. The NIA provided 

that States could use these ranges as 

rough blueprints to guide the 

development of their budgets, but that 

States could also prepare budgets that 

were above or below the ranges 

specified. States were encouraged to 

develop budgets that were appropriate 

to implement the plans they outlined in 

their applications. In developing the 

budget ranges, the Department grouped 

the States into five categories by ranking 

every State according to its share of the 

national population of children ages 5 

through 17 and identifying natural 

breaks in the population numbers. The 

Department then developed overlapping 

budget ranges for each category based 

on the student population data. 

The Department received 41 

applications in Phase 1. States’ budget 

requests ranged from 90 percent to 297 

percent of the suggested budget 

maximums. There was significant 

variability in the extent to which State 

budget requests conformed to the 

Department’s suggested budget ranges, 

including significant variability among 

the budget requests from similarly sized 

States. 

Following the peer review of Phase 1 

applications, we analyzed the rank 

order of States based upon their scores 

and compared the rank order with the 

extent to which the State conformed 

with or exceeded the Department’s 

suggested budget ranges. We found no 

relationship between a State’s rank and 

its budget request. 

In light of this analysis, we conclude 

that States can propose high-quality 

Race to the Top plans within the 

Department’s suggested budget ranges, 

particularly given that, as part of their 

reform plans, States are expected to 

coordinate, reallocate, or repurpose 

other Federal, State, and local sources of 

funding to support their Race to the Top 

goals. To ensure a robust competition in 

Phase 2 and to stimulate comprehensive 

education reform throughout the 

country, we are establishing the 

suggested budget ranges as mandatory 

funding limits for Phase 2 of the 

competition. 

Race to the Top grantees will serve as 

models of best reform practices across 

their States and the country; 

accordingly, we want to ensure that the 

Secretary can fund, at an adequate level, 

a sufficient number of high-quality 

applications within this finite ARRA 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 63 / Friday, April 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 16669 

1The Department developed budget ranges for 

each State by ranking every State according to its 

share of the national population of children ages 5 

through 17 based on data from ‘‘Estimates of the 

Resident Population by Selected Age Groups for the 

United States, States, and Puerto Rico: July 1, 2008’’ 

released by the Population Division of the U.S. 

Census Bureau. The Department identified the 

natural breaks in the population data and then 

developed overlapping budget ranges for each 

category taking into consideration the total amount 

of funds available for awards. 

funding. Requiring States to conform to 

the Department’s budget ranges will 

allow more grants to be awarded. 

Accordingly, these interim final 

requirements make the previously 

suggested budget ranges binding on 

State applicants applying in Phase 2 of 

the competition. 

Waiver of Rulemaking and Delayed 

Effective Date: Under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 

U.S.C. 553), the Department is generally 

required to publish a notice of proposed 

rulemaking and provide the public with 

an opportunity to comment on proposed 

regulations prior to establishing a final 

rule. However, we are waiving the 

notice-and-comment rulemaking 

requirements under the APA. Section 

553(b) of the APA provides that an 

agency is not required to conduct 

notice-and-comment rulemaking when 

the agency for good cause finds that 

notice and public procedure thereon are 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest. Although these 

requirements are subject to the APA’s 

notice-and-comment requirements, the 

Secretary has determined that it would 

be impracticable and contrary to the 

public interest to conduct notice-andcomment rulemaking. 

As noted above, these interim final 

requirements are needed to establish 

mandatory budget ranges in the final 

Race to the Top Fund requirements 

published on November 18, 2009. The 

Department believes that mandatory 

budget ranges are necessary due, in part, 

to the extent to which Phase 1 

applications exceeded the 

recommended budget ranges. 

Additionally, as previously indicated, 

Phase 2 Race to the Top applications are 

due on June 1, 2010. We chose this date 

to allow sufficient time for States to 

prepare their applications and for the 

Department to conduct Phase 2 of the 

competition, so that grant awards can be 

made by September 30, 2010, when all 

ARRA funds must be obligated. Even on 

an extremely expedited timeline, it 

would be impracticable for the 

Department to conduct notice-andcomment rulemaking and then 

promulgate final requirements before 

the June 1, 2010 deadline for Phase 2 

applications. Publishing a notice of 

proposed rulemaking, reviewing the 

public comments, and issuing final 

regulations normally takes at least four 

to six months. We are concerned that, 

when added to the time the Department 

will need to conduct Phase 2 of the 

competition in addition to the time that 

States will need to plan and draft 

applications that conform to these 

budget ranges, the Department might 

not be able to award Race to the Top 

grants by the obligation deadline of 

September 30, 2010. With billions of 

public dollars at stake, it would be 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest for the Department to take this 

risk of not obligating all funds by 

September 30. 

Accordingly, and in order to make 

timely grant awards with ARRA funds, 

the Secretary is issuing these interim 

final requirements without first 

publishing proposed requirements for 

public comment. These interim final 

requirements govern Phase 2 of the Race 

to the Top competition. 

Although the Department is adopting 

these requirements on an interim final 

basis, the Department requests public 

comment on these requirements. After 

consideration of public comments, the 

Secretary will publish final 

requirements. The final requirements 

would govern any subsequent 

competition conducted under the Race 

to the Top program. 

The APA also requires that a 

substantive rule be published at least 30 

days before its effective date, except as 

otherwise provided for good cause 

(5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)). For the reasons 

outlined in the preceding paragraphs, 

the Secretary has determined that a 

delayed effective date for these interim 

final requirements would be 

unnecessary and contrary to the public 

interest, and that good cause exists to 

waive the requirement for a delayed 

effective date. As such, this rule is 

effective on the date it is published. 

Summary of the Interim Final 

Requirements 

Current final requirements: The 

current final requirements do not 

contain any requirements related to the 

total amount a State may request in its 

Race to the Top budget. 

Interim final requirements: The 

interim final requirements add a section 

entitled ‘‘Budget Requirements,’’ 

specifying that State Race to the Top 

budgets must conform to the budget 

ranges developed by the Department. 

Reasons: In Phase 1 of the Race to the 

Top competition, States’ budget requests 

varied widely and almost every 

applicant exceeded the budget ranges 

suggested in the NIA. The Department 

did not expect that States would 

propose budgets that differed so 

significantly from the suggested budget 

ranges, which, as indicated previously, 

were developed based on current State 

population data. We believe that States 

can propose successful Race to the Top 

plans within these ranges because we 

did not find a relationship between 

States’ scoring ranks and the extent to 

which States exceeded the Department’s 

suggested budget ranges. By requiring 

States to conform to specific budget 

ranges, we will ensure that the Secretary 

can fund, at an adequate level, multiple 

high-quality applications. 

Interim Final Requirements 

34 CFR CHAPTER 2 

■ For the reasons discussed previously, 

the Secretary amends the final Race to 

the Top Fund requirements published 

in the Federal Register on November 18, 

2009 (74 FR 59836) to include a new 

section as follows: 

Budget Requirements: For Phase 2 of 

the Fiscal Year 2010 competition, and 

for any subsequent competitions, the 

State’s budget must conform to the 

following budget ranges: 1

Category 1—$350–700 million: 

California, Texas, New York, Florida. 

Category 2—$200–400 million: 

Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Georgia, 

Michigan, North Carolina, New Jersey. 

Category 3—$150–250 million: 

Virginia, Arizona, Indiana, Washington, 

Tennessee, Massachusetts, Missouri, 

Maryland, Wisconsin. 

Category 4—$60–175 million: 

Minnesota, Colorado, Alabama, 

Louisiana, South Carolina, Puerto Rico, 

Kentucky, Oklahoma, Oregon, 

Connecticut, Utah, Mississippi, Iowa, 

Arkansas, Kansas, Nevada. 

Category 5—$20–75 million: New 

Mexico, Nebraska, Idaho, West Virginia, 

New Hampshire, Maine, Hawaii, Rhode 

Island, Montana, Delaware, South 

Dakota, Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont, 

Wyoming, District of Columbia. 

The State should develop a budget 

that is appropriate for the plan it 

outlines in its application; however we 

will not consider a State’s application if 

its request exceeds the maximum in its 

budget range. 

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 

(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 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
16670 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 63 / Friday, April 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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. 

Potential Costs and Benefits 

Under Executive Order 12866, we 

have assessed the potential costs and 

benefits of this regulatory action and 

have determined that this rule will not 

impose additional costs to State 

applicants, grantees, or the Federal 

government. The Department is 

regulating only to incorporate 

mandatory budget ranges into the final 

Race to the Top requirements. It may 

take a State applicant time to create or 

revise its Race to the Top budget so that 

it conforms to the required budget range 

contained in this regulatory action if the 

State had intended to request more than 

the maximum in the range. We believe, 

however, that the benefits of this action 

outweigh any potential burden that it 

may cause. Additionally, the 

Department has determined that this 

regulatory action does not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and Tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Certification: The Secretary certifies that 

these interim final requirements will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The Secretary makes this certification 

because the only entities eligible to 

apply for grants are States, and States 

are not small entities. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995: 

The interim final requirements contain 

information collection requirements that 

are subject to review by OMB under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). The Department had 

received previously emergency approval 

for the information collections in the 

final Race to the Top Fund requirements 

published on November 18, 2009, under 

OMB Control Number 1810–0697. The 

Department will submit to OMB a 

Paperwork Reduction Act Change 

Worksheet for this collection that will 

include the changes described in this 

notice. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 79. 

One of the objectives of the Executive 

Order is to foster an intergovernmental 

partnership and a strengthened 

federalism. The Executive Order relies 

on processes developed by State and 

local governments for coordination and 

review of proposed Federal financial 

assistance. 

This document provides notification 

of our specific plans regarding budget 

requirements for this program. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

You may 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: March 29, 2010. 

Arne Duncan, 

Secretary of Education. 

[FR Doc. 2010–7409 Filed 4–1–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 9 and 721 

[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2008–0918; FRL–8816–9] 

RIN 2070–AB27 

1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-; 

Withdrawal of Significant New Use 

Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is withdrawing a 

significant new use rule (SNUR) 

promulgated under section 5(a)(2) of the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 

for the chemical substance identified as 

1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (CAS No. 

754–12–1), which was the subject of 

premanufacture notice (PMN) P–07– 

601. EPA published the SNUR using 

direct final rulemaking procedures. EPA 

received a notice of intent to submit 

adverse comments on the rule. 

Therefore, the Agency is withdrawing 

the SNUR, as required under the 

expedited SNUR rulemaking process. 

Elsewhere in today’s Federal Register, 

EPA is publishing (under separate 

notice and comment rulemaking 

procedures) a proposed SNUR for this 

substance. 

DATES: This final rule is effective April 

2, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general information contact: Colby 

Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, 

Environmental Assistance Division 

(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (202) 554–1404; e-mail address: 

TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov. 

For technical information contact: 

Karen Chu, Chemical Control Division 

(7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (202) 564–8773; e-mail address: 

chu.karen@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

A list of potentially affected entities is 

provided in the Federal Register of 

February 1, 2010 (75 FR 4983) (FRL– 

8438–4). If you have questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the technical 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

II. What Rule is Being Withdrawn? 

In the Federal Register of February 1, 

2010 (75 FR 4983), EPA issued several 

direct final SNURs, including a SNUR 

for the chemical substance that is the 

subject of this withdrawal. These direct 

final rules were issued pursuant to the 

procedures in 40 CFR part 721, subpart 

D. In accordance with 40 CFR 

721.170(d)(4)(i), EPA is withdrawing the 

rule issued for 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3- 

tetrafluoro- (PMN P–07–601; CAS No. 

754–12–1) at 40 CFR 721.10182 because 

the Agency received a notice of intent 

to submit adverse comments. Elsewhere 

in today’s Federal Register, EPA is 

proposing a SNUR for this chemical 

substance via notice and comment 

rulemaking. 

For further information regarding 

EPA’s expedited process for issuing 

SNURs, interested parties are directed to 

40 CFR part 721, subpart D, and the 

Federal Register of July 27, 1989 (54 FR 

31314). The record for the direct final 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1