85502 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

1 88 FR 16924. 2 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6). 

§ 165.T14–0743 Safety Zone; Pacific 

Ocean, Lahaina Boat Basin, Maui, HI— 

Emergency Operations and Port Recovery. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

safety zone: All waters extending 200 

yards from shore from the northernmost 

boundary, 60 yards south of the 

intersection of Front Street and Baker 

Street, Maui, to the southernmost 

boundary, 20 yards south of the 

intersection of Front Street and Shaw 

Street, Maui. 

(b) Definitions. As used in this 

section, designated representative 

means a Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander, including a Coast Guard 

coxswain, petty officer, or other officer 

operating a Coast Guard vessel and a 

Federal, State, and local officer 

designated by or assisting the Captain of 

the Port Sector Honolulu (COTP) in the 

enforcement of the safety zone. 

(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general 

safety zone regulations in subpart C of 

this part, you may not enter the safety 

zone described in paragraph (a) of this 

section unless authorized by the COTP 

or the COTP’s designated representative. 

(2) To seek permission to enter, 

contact the COTP or the COTP’s 

representative by VHF/FM Chanel 16. 

Those in the safety zone must comply 

with all lawful orders or directions 

given to them by the COTP or the 

COTP’s designated representative. 

(d) Enforcement period. This rule will 

be enforced December 1, 2023, through 

December 15, 2023, unless an earlier 

end is announced by broadcast notice to 

mariners. 

Dated: December 1, 2023. 

A.L. Kirksey, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sector Honolulu. 

[FR Doc. 2023–26808 Filed 12–7–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Parts 662 and 663 

RIN 1840–AD90 

Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation 

Research Abroad Fellowship Program 

and Faculty Research Abroad 

Fellowship Program 

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary 

Education, Department of Education. 

ACTION: Final regulations. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Education (Department or we) issues 

final regulations governing the 

Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation 

Research Abroad (DDRA) Fellowship 

Program and the Faculty Research 

Abroad (FRA) Fellowship Program. This 

rule revises language proficiency 

qualifications for DDRA and FRA 

applicants and clarifies the Secretary’s 

discretionary use of eligibility criteria. 

DATES: These regulations are effective 

January 8, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Pamela J. Maimer, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

5th Floor, Washington, DC 20202. 

Telephone: (202) 453–6891. Email: 

pamela.maimer@ed.gov. 

If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or 

have a speech disability and wish to 

access telecommunications relay 

services, please dial 7–1–1. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The DDRA Fellowship Program 

provides opportunities for doctoral 

students to engage in dissertation 

research abroad in modern foreign 

languages and area studies. The program 

is designed to contribute to the 

development and improvement of the 

study of modern foreign languages and 

area studies in the United States and to 

increase scholars’ knowledge of the 

culture of the people in the countries or 

regions of research. The program 

provides fellowships to doctoral 

candidates who are planning a teaching 

career in the United States upon 

completion of their programs and who 

possess sufficient foreign language skills 

in the country or countries of research 

to carry out the dissertation research 

project. 

The FRA Fellowship Program 

provides opportunities for faculty 

members teaching modern foreign 

languages or area studies at U.S. 

institutions of higher education (IHEs) 

to engage in research abroad in those 

languages or areas studied. The program 

is designed to contribute to the faculty 

members’ foreign language skills and to 

increase knowledge of the culture of the 

people in the countries or regions of 

research. 

On March 21, 2023, the Secretary 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) for these parts in 

the Federal Register.1 These final 

regulations contain changes from the 

NPRM, which we explain in the 

Analysis of Comments and Changes 

section of this document. 

Public Comment: In response to our 

invitation in the NPRM, the Department 

received five comments on the proposed 

regulations. We address those comments 

in the Analysis of Comments and 

Changes section below. 

Analysis of Comments and Changes 

We group issues according to subject, 

with appropriate sections of the 

regulations referenced in parentheses, 

where applicable. We discuss other 

substantive issues under the sections of 

the regulations to which they pertain. 

Generally, we do not address minor, 

non-substantive changes (such as 

renumbering paragraphs, adding a word, 

or typographical errors). Additionally, 

we do not address recommended 

changes that the statute does not 

authorize the Secretary to make or 

comments pertaining to operational 

processes. We generally do not address 

comments pertaining to issues that were 

not within the scope of the NPRM. 

An analysis of the public comments 

received and the changes to the 

regulations since publication of the 

NPRM follows. 

General Support 

Comments: Two commenters 

supported the proposed regulations. 

Discussion: We thank the commenters 

for their support. We believe these 

changes maintain the statutory goals 

and the integrity of the programs. 

Changes: None. 

General Opposition 

Comments: One commenter objected 

to the existence of both the DDRA and 

the FRA programs. 

Discussion: These programs are 

authorized by statute.2

Changes: None. 

Secretarial Discretion (§§ 662.21(c) and 

663.21(c)) 

Comments: One commenter asked the 

Department to explain whether the 

proposed rule is intended to merely 

clarify the Secretary’s existing 

discretion to vary selection criteria 

point values assigned to DDRA or FRA, 

which was granted in a 2005 

rulemaking, or whether the proposed 

rule would grant new discretion to the 

Secretary. If the latter, the commenter 

believed that the Department should 

explain any additional discretion and 

give the public an opportunity to 

comment on the proposed expansion. 

The commenter further opined that, 

as the Fulbright-Hays Act and the 

Department’s eligibility regulations 

require the Secretary to meaningfully 

consider foreign language skills, the 

Department should finalize §§ 662.21(c) 

and 663.21(c) without the proposed 

‘‘one or more’’ phrase in the 

introductory text or otherwise clarify 

that the Secretary may not ignore 

foreign language skills when awarding 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 85503 

3See Lujan v. U.S. Dep’t of Educ., No. 3:22–CV– 

00159–DCG, F. Supp. 3d__, 2023 WL 2638280 

(W.D. Tex. Mar. 24, 2023). 

4See 34 CFR 75.201 (‘‘[i]n the application 

package or a notice published in the Federal 

Register, the Secretary informs applicants of . . . 

[t]he selection criteria chosen[.]’’). 

5 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6). 

DDRA and FRA Fellowships. The 

commenter objected to the proposed 

rule to the extent that it would grant 

discretion to ignore foreign language 

skills in the DDRA and FRA 

competitions. 

Lastly, this commenter stated that, if 

finalized as proposed, the revisions to 

§§ 662.21(c)(3), 662.21(c)(4), 

663.21(c)(3), and 663.21(c)(4) would 

address the concerns identified in a 

recent lawsuit filed on behalf of DDRA 

applicants 3 who challenged the weight 

given to their respective native 

languages in the selection process. 

Discussion: The Department 

appreciates this commenter’s concerns 

and wishes to clarify that the additional 

discretion proposed under §§ 662.21(c) 

and 663.21(c) to allow the Secretary to 

consider ‘‘one or more’’ of the listed 

applicant qualification criteria, while 

expanding the Secretary’s discretion 

under these particular programs, is an 

appropriate exercise of the Secretary’s 

general authority under 34 CFR 75.201 

to identify and notify applicants of grant 

competition selection criteria (an 

authority which is routinely used, for 

example, across Departmental programs 

utilizing the general selection criteria 

under 34 CFR 75.210) and is consistent 

with the Fulbright-Hays Act.4 The 

Department would only use this 

flexibility consistent with the programs’ 

statutory requirement to ‘‘promot[e] 

modern foreign language training and 

area studies in United States 

schools[.]’’ 5 The Department believes 

that it is able to discharge this 

requirement and the purpose of these 

grants for ‘‘improving [an applicant’s] 

skill in languages’’ within the 

framework of several of the criteria 

looking at the Qualification of an 

Applicant, and that this duty does not 

rest solely on any single criteria under 

that section. The flexibility to select 

‘‘one or more’’ of the applicant 

qualification criteria under §§ 662.21(c) 

and 663.21(c) will enhance the 

Department’s ability to structure its 

grant competitions to select the most 

qualified applicants for funding, 

because it will allow the Department to 

focus from year-to-year on those 

selection criteria that have yielded 

applications from the most qualified 

candidates. It also will allow the 

Department to review the effect of 

omitting a particular selection criterion 

in a given year on the quality of 

applicants, without having to go 

through additional rulemaking to obtain 

this information. 

Changes: None. 

Severability (§§ 662.8 and 663.8) 

Comments: None. 

Discussion: Current regulations in 34 

CFR 662 and 663 do not address 

severability. The Department seeks to 

clarify its intent that, with regard to 

severability, each of the regulations in 

34 CFR parts 662 and 663 and its 

subparts serves one or more important, 

related, but distinct, purposes. To best 

serve these purposes, we included this 

administrative provision in the 

regulations to make clear that the 

regulations are designed to operate 

independently of each other and to 

convey the Department’s intent that the 

potential invalidity of one provision or 

any of its subparts should not affect the 

remainder of the provisions. 

Changes: We have added new 

severability provisions in §§ 662.8 and 

663.8. 

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 

14094 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, 

the Secretary must determine whether 

this regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ 

and, therefore, subject to the 

requirements of the E.O. and subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of E.O. 

12866, as amended by E.O. 14094, 

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 $200 million or more 

(adjusted every three years by the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) for changes in gross domestic 

product); or adversely affect in a 

material way the economy, a sector of 

the economy, productivity, competition, 

jobs, the environment, public health or 

safety, or state, local, territorial, or 

Tribal governments or communities; 

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impacts of entitlements, grants, user 

fees, or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise legal or policy issues for 

which centralized review would 

meaningfully further the President’s 

priorities or the principles stated in the 

Executive order, as specifically 

authorized in a timely manner by the 

Administrator of OIRA in each case. 

This final regulatory action is not a 

significant regulatory action subject to 

review by OMB under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866 (as amended by 

E.O. 14094). 

We have also reviewed these 

regulations under E.O. 13563, which 

supplements and explicitly reaffirms the 

principles, structures, and definitions 

governing regulatory review established 

in E.O. 12866. To the extent permitted 

by law, E.O. 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 

providing information that enables the 

public to make choices. 

E.O. 13563 also requires an agency ‘‘to 

use the best available techniques to 

quantify anticipated present and future 

benefits and costs as accurately as 

possible.’’ OMB’s OIRA has emphasized 

that these techniques may include 

‘‘identifying changing future 

compliance costs that might result from 

technological innovation or anticipated 

behavioral changes.’’ 

The Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, both 

quantitative and qualitative, of this 

regulatory action, and we are issuing 

these final requirements only on a 

reasoned determination that their 

benefits justify their costs. In choosing 

among alternative regulatory 

approaches, we selected those 

approaches that would maximize net 

benefits. Based on the analysis that 

follows and the reasons stated 

elsewhere in this document, the 

Department believes that the final 

requirements are consistent with the 

principles in E.O. 13563. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
85504 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

6 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6). 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action does not unduly 

interfere with state, local, territorial, or 

Tribal governments in the exercise of 

their governmental functions. 

In this regulatory impact analysis, we 

discuss the need for regulatory action, 

the potential costs and benefits, and net 

budget impacts. 

Elsewhere, under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), we 

identify and explain burdens 

specifically associated with information 

collection requirements. 

Need for Regulatory Action 

The Department amends the DDRA 

and FRA program regulations to 

promote fairness in the application 

review process for native speakers of 

languages other than English. These 

revisions are also consistent with the 

statutory framework for the DDRA and 

FRA programs and are necessary to 

support the statutory goal of ‘‘promoting 

modern foreign language training and 

area studies in United States 

schools[.]’’ 6 Additionally, revising the 

introductory language of §§ 662.21(c) 

and 663.21(c) to allow consideration of 

‘‘one or more’’ of the listed criteria will 

enable the Department to administer 

these competitive grant programs in a 

manner that prioritizes the most 

qualified applicants for funding. 

Finally, the addition of severability 

clauses to the regulations for these 

programs will enable the Department to 

administer these programs more 

effectively if a component of the 

regulations is invalidated by a court. 

Discussion of Costs, Benefits, and 

Transfers 

The Department believes this 

regulatory action will not impose 

significant new cost-bearing 

requirements on IHEs or other entities. 

We also believe that the benefits of 

implementing this regulatory action 

outweigh any associated costs. 

We anticipate a minimal increase of 

10–15 DDRA and FRA program 

applications as a result of eliminating 

the native language proficiency 

exclusion and foresee minimal impact 

on the Department’s time and cost for 

reviewing these additional applications. 

Over the last 5 years, the amount of 

annual funding for the DDRA program 

has ranged from approximately $3.4 to 

$5.5 million, with an average of 200 

grant applications received per year, 

and an average of 50 percent of 

applications ultimately receiving grant 

awards. With the changes to the 

regulation, the Department expects an 

increase of 10–15 applications per year, 

based on the number of applicants that 

have applied to study a geographic area 

that shares their native language skills 

in recent years. 

An increase in the number of 

applicants or awards granted could 

result in additional costs to the 

Department in securing readers to 

review applications, but if additional 

costs arise, they will be minimal. The 

Department pays readers $1,200 to 

review applications, and the number of 

applications per reader ranges from 15 

to a maximum of 22. An increase in 10– 

15 applications could increase costs by 

an additional $1,200 to secure an 

additional reader. However, the number 

of DDRA applications has declined over 

the last several years from a high of 

almost 250 to a low of just more than 

150 in 2022. As a result, an increase in 

immediate applications would not 

result in any overall comparative 

additional costs, as a nominal increase 

in applications will restore DDRA to the 

average amount of applications received 

in prior years. We anticipate no 

additional costs to grant recipients, as 

we will continue to pay for grant 

activities with program funds. We also 

note that program participation is 

voluntary. 

In fiscal year (FY) 2022, the 

Department conducted an FRA 

competition and awarded 22 recipients 

a total of approximately $1.3 million. 

The FY 2022 competition was the first 

FRA competition in more than 10 years. 

The Fulbright-Hays appropriation 

decreased from $15.6 million in FY 

2010 to $7.5 million in FY 2011; the 

nearly 50 percent decrease in available 

funding hindered our ability to conduct 

competitions and make awards under 

all four Fulbright-Hays programs. The 

result was a suspension of the FRA 

program from 2011 to 2021. 

Between 2011 and 2021, the funding 

level for the Fulbright-Hays programs 

averaged $7.4 million. In FY 2022, the 

amount increased to $9.8 million, which 

enabled us to re-activate the FRA 

program. Although we will not conduct 

the FRA competition in FY 2023, we do 

anticipate conducting another FRA 

competition in FY 2024, contingent 

upon funding availability. Given that we 

held only one FRA competition in the 

last 10 years, we cannot discuss 

potential trends in those program 

applications or potential corresponding 

costs. 

The benefits of these final regulations 

include better aligning DDRA and FRA 

applicant qualifications with other 

comparable grant programs to focus on 

overall language proficiency and 

increasing equitable access to research 

abroad for those demonstrating language 

proficiency in the language of the 

countries in which their doctoral-level 

or faculty research study will occur. 

This will apply regardless of the 

applicant’s native language. 

Additionally, we expect that the 

regulations will lead to an increase in 

the number of applications overall, 

which will make the program more 

competitive and enable the Department 

to fund even higher quality 

applications. The increase in 

applications specifically from 

individuals with native languages other 

than English will yield additional 

applications from individuals speaking 

a wider variety of native languages, as 

well as more applications recommended 

for funding from these individuals. 

These regulations will also more fully 

account for proficiency by adding a new 

selection criterion that considers an 

applicant’s academic record. Under this 

criterion, we will consider any steps the 

applicant has taken to improve 

proficiency in the language of study and 

ensure adequate preparation for the 

proposed research project. We believe 

this criterion will support the 

programmatic goal of the DDRA and 

FRA to promote training ‘‘in United 

States schools, colleges, and 

universities.’’ Allowing applicants to 

show steps taken to improve their 

language proficiency in an academic 

setting will better demonstrate their 

ability to study in that language abroad. 

This change may also encourage 

applicants to complete additional 

training as a way to strengthen their 

application. 

Finally, providing Secretarial 

discretion to determine the factors that 

will be considered when reviewing the 

qualifications of applicants would 

increase flexibility to implement the 

program within statutory requirements 

while adapting to changing 

Departmental priorities for international 

and foreign language education. This 

change will align DDRA and FRA with 

other Departmental programs that 

provide discretion to the Secretary to 

select among the regulated selection 

criteria when deciding which criteria to 

emphasize in a competition year. 

We do not anticipate any cost to the 

Federal government as a result of this 

particular change, beyond nominal costs 

associated with updating the 

application package. We do not expect 

any impact on the number of 

applications received as a result of this 

change, nor do we anticipate any costs 

to grant recipients. Accordingly, we do 

not anticipate any burden cost with the 

addition of this particular criterion. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 85505 

7 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6). 

8 Ibid. 

9 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 

10 In some prior regulations, the Department 

categorized small businesses based on tax status. 

Those regulations defined ‘‘non-profit 

organizations’’ as ‘‘small organizations’’ if they were 

independently owned and operated and not 

dominant in their field of operation, or as ‘‘small 

entities’’ if they were institutions controlled by 

governmental entities with populations below 

50,000. Those definitions resulted in the 

categorization of all private nonprofit organizations 

as small and no public institutions as small. Under 

the previous definition, proprietary institutions 

were considered small if they were independently 

owned and operated and not dominant in their field 

of operation with total annual revenue below 

$7,000,000. 

Net Budget Impacts 

These proposed regulations are not 

estimated to have a significant net 

impact on the Federal budget. As noted 

above, the Department estimates that 

these final regulations will not result in 

additional net costs. 

Alternatives Considered 

In addition to allowing native 

speakers to receive points based on 

§§ 662.21(c)(3) and 663.21(c)(3), we 

considered allowing English as the 

language for the country of research, 

which is currently restricted. We did 

not take that approach because we 

believe maintaining the requirement 

that applicants demonstrate proficiency 

in a language ‘‘other than English’’ more 

appropriately meets the statutory goal of 

‘‘promoting modern foreign language 

training and area studies in United 

States schools[.]’’ 7

We also considered continuing to 

solely provide points for language 

proficiency without consideration of 

additional steps taken to improve 

proficiency. We did not take that 

approach because we believe that 

including a criterion that considers 

steps taken to improve proficiency in a 

domestic academic setting better meets 

the statutory goal of promoting training 

‘‘in United States schools, colleges, and 

universities’’ 8 and will better 

demonstrate applicants’ ability to study 

in that language abroad. This change 

may also encourage applicants to 

complete additional training as a way to 

strengthen their application. 

Additionally, we believe that replacing 

the exclusion for native language skills 

other than English with a focus on both 

an applicant’s current foreign language 

skills and efforts to master the language 

of study will be more effective in 

increasing the capabilities and diversity 

of applicants and participants, while 

remaining consistent with the statutory 

goals of these programs. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 

The Secretary certifies under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 9 that these 

regulations will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of ‘‘small entities.’’ 

The small entities that will be affected 

by the proposed regulations are IHEs 

that submit applications to the 

Department under this program. The 

final regulations will not have a 

significant economic impact on the 

small entities affected because they will 

not impose excessive regulatory burdens 

or require unnecessary Federal 

supervision. The final regulations will 

impose minimal requirements to ensure 

the proper expenditure of program 

funds. 

In the NPRM, we invited the public to 

comment on our proposed certification 

that these regulations would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. We 

did not receive any comments on this 

subject. 

The Small Business Administration 

(SBA) defines ‘‘small institution’’ using 

data on revenue, market dominance, tax 

filing status, governing body, and 

population. Most entities to which the 

Office of Postsecondary Education’s 

regulations apply are postsecondary 

institutions. However, we do not require 

institutions to report such data to the 

Department. As a result, for purposes of 

this final rule, the Department defines 

‘‘small entities’’ by reference to 

enrollment to allow meaningful 

comparison of regulatory impact across 

all types of higher education 

institutions.10 We consider two-year 

postsecondary educational institutions 

with enrollment of fewer than 500 fulltime equivalent (FTE) and 4-year 

postsecondary educational institutions 

with enrollment of fewer than 1,000 

FTE to be small entities. 

TABLE 1—SMALL INSTITUTIONS UNDER ENROLLMENT-BASED DEFINITION

Type Small Total Percentage 

of total 

Proprietary ................................................................................................................................... 1,973 2,331 85 

2-year .................................................................................................................................... 1,734 1,990 87 

4-year .................................................................................................................................... 239 341 70 

Private not-for-profit ..................................................................................................................... 983 1,831 54 

2-year .................................................................................................................................... 185 203 91 

4-year .................................................................................................................................... 798 1,628 49 

Public ........................................................................................................................................... 380 1,924 20 

2-year .................................................................................................................................... 317 1,145 28 

4-year .................................................................................................................................... 63 779 8 

Total ............................................................................................................................... 3,336 6,086 55 

Source: Department analysis of 2020–21 IPEDS data. 

The Department used Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System 

(IPEDS) data from fiscal year 2020 

reported under the finance data 

category. This reporting does not 

include all participating institutions and 

provides approximate data. 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act also 

requires us to estimate the effect of the 

final regulations on small entities. We 

identified 27 of the 97 affected entities 

as small. As noted above, we estimated 

that this final rule will result in benefits 

for all affected entities without 

regulatory burden. We estimated that 

small institutions will, on average, see 

an increase of approximately $952,400 

in funding. Similarly, we projected that 

non-small institutions will receive an 

increase of approximately $407,900. 

In terms of regulatory impact, these 

regulations are designed to avoid 

excessive burdens or unnecessary 

Federal supervision. The minimal cost 

that these regulations will impose are 

those associated with grantees’ 

obligation to certify participant 

eligibility and safeguard the proper 

expenditure of program funds. 

Consequently, the Department certifies 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
85506 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

11 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). 

that this rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

As part of its continuing effort to 

reduce paperwork and respondent 

burden, the Department provides the 

general public and Federal agencies 

with an opportunity to comment on 

proposed and continuing collections of 

information in accordance with the 

PRA.11 This helps to ensure that the 

public understands the Department’s 

collection instructions, respondents can 

provide the requested data in the 

desired format, reporting burden (time 

and financial resources) is minimized, 

collection instruments are clearly 

understood, and the Department can 

properly assess the impact of collection 

requirements on respondents. 

Sections 662.21(c)(3) and 663.21(c)(3) 

of the regulations contain information 

collection requirements. Under the PRA, 

the Department submitted a copy of 

these sections to OMB for review. 

A Federal agency may not conduct or 

sponsor a collection of information 

unless OMB approves the collection 

under the PRA and the corresponding 

information collection instrument 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. Notwithstanding any other 

provision of law, no person is required 

to comply with, or is subject to penalty 

for failure to comply with, a collection 

of information if the collection 

instrument does not display a currently 

valid OMB control number. 

In these final regulations, we provide 

the control number assigned by OMB to 

any information collection 

requirements. The information 

collection impacted by these regulatory 

changes is the Application for the DDRA 

and FRA Programs, OMB Control 

Number 1840–0005. Under the DDRA 

and FRA programs, individual scholars 

apply through eligible institutions for an 

institutional grant to support the 

research fellowship. These institutions 

administer the program, in cooperation 

with the Department, pursuant to 

§§ 102(b)(6) and 104(e)(1) of the Mutual 

Educational and Cultural Exchange Act 

of 1961 (Fulbright-Hays Act), 34 CFR 

parts 662 and 663, the Policy Statements 

of the J. William Fulbright Foreign 

Scholarship Board (FSB), and the 

Education Department General 

Administrative Regulations (EDGAR). 

The Department, U.S. foreign 

language and area studies specialists, 

the U.S. Department of State, U.S. 

Embassies, Fulbright Commissions, host 

country officials and scholars, and the 

FSB use these data. This use is 

necessary to determine the academic 

qualifications and suitability of the 

individual applicant, potential political 

sensitivity and feasibility of the project 

in the host country, research climate, 

and adequacy of the proposed budget. 

The Department awards grants under 

these programs annually. 

The DDRA and FRA application 

(1840–0005) will be affected by the 

regulatory changes in the following 

ways: 

• We will change the application 

package to eliminate the native language 

proficiency exclusion. 

• We will include additional 

language in the DDRA and FRA 

selection criteria (under §§ 662.21(c)(3) 

and 663.21(c)(3)) that requires minimal 

changes on the technical review forms. 

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED BURDEN HOURS

Program Number of 

respondents 

Average 

burden hours 

per response 

Total 

burden hours 

Estimated 

respondent 

average 

hourly wage 

Total annual 

costs 

(hourly wage 

× total 

burden hours) 

DDRA Student Respondent ................................................. 325 25 8,125 $0 $0 

DDRA Institution Project Director ........................................ 50 25 1,250 47.20 59,000 

FRA Faculty Respondent ..................................................... 70 25 1,750 36.33 63,578 

FRA Institution Project Director ........................................... 50 15 750 47.20 35,400 

Annualized total ............................................................ 495 ........................ 11,875 ........................ 157,978 

The hour burden for individual DDRA 

student respondents is estimated at an 

average of 25 hours for each student. 

The cost burden for DDRA student 

applicants is zero. We estimated that the 

changes to these regulations may result 

in a small increase in the number of 

DDRA student respondents from 310 to 

325 submitting a single application. 

When multiplied by 25 hours, this 

results in an increase in DDRA student 

burden hours from 7,750 to 8,125. 

We estimated the hour burden for the 

50 DDRA institutional project directors 

to be 25 hours for reviewing each DDRA 

application for a total burden of 1,250. 

The cost burden of $47.20 for 

institutional DDRA applicants totals 

$59,000. We used feedback from DDRA 

respondents during the last three years 

to estimate these amounts. 

The hour burden for the 70 individual 

FRA respondents is estimated to average 

25 hours for each faculty member to 

complete the application for a total of 

1,750 hours. The cost burden for faculty 

applicants at $36.33 totals $63,578. 

The hour burden for the 50 FRA 

institutional project directors is 

estimated to be 15 hours for reviewing 

each FRA application for a total burden 

of 750 hours. The cost burden for 

institutional FRA applicants at $47.20 is 

$35,400. These estimates are based on 

feedback from FRA respondents during 

the last three years. 

These estimates incorporate 

completion of the following tasks: 

1. Register in the G5 e-Application 

system (project director); 

2. Complete official forms (student/ 

faculty and project director); 

3. Develop the application narrative 

and budget (student/faculty); 

4. Screen individual completed 

applications (project director); and 

5. Transmit completed individual 

applications to the Department in a 

single submission via G5 (project 

director). 

We note that the hour burdens for the 

DDRA and FRA project directors differ 

because the FRA program is smaller and 

has fewer applicants. DDRA project 

directors generally process applications 

for multiple students; FRA project 

directors generally process an 

application for a single faculty member. 

The data in Table 2 are an estimate of 

the time needed for both institutional 

project directors and individual student 

and faculty respondents to complete 

tasks listed. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 85507 

TABLE 3—COLLECTION OF INFORMATION

Regulatory section Information collection OMB Control #1840–0005—estimated burden 

34 CFR § 662.21(c)(3) ......... This regulatory provision will require changing the application package to eliminate the native language proficiency exclusion.The number of respondents and the number of annual 

burden hours will increase to 495 and 11,875 respectively; the annual burden costs will remain at 

$157,978. 

34 CFR § 663.21(c)(3) ......... This regulatory provision will require new language in 

the DDRA and FRA selection criteria to consider 

steps an applicant has taken to improve their language proficiency.

The number of respondents and the number of annual 

burden hours will increase to 495 and 11,875 respectively; the annual burden costs will remain at 

$157,978. 

We prepared an Information 

Collection Request (ICR) for these 

changes to the information collection 

requirements. We invited the public to 

comment on the ICR but did not receive 

any comments. 

OMB approved the collection of 

information contained in these 

regulations under OMB Control number 

1840–0005 on March 2, 2023. 

Intergovernmental Review 

The proposed regulations are not 

subject to E.O. 12372 and the 

regulations in 34 CFR part 79. 

Assessment of Educational Impact 

Based on our review, we have 

determined that these regulations do not 

require transmission of information that 

any other agency or authority of the 

United States gathers or makes 

available. 

Federalism 

E.O. 13132 requires us to obtain 

meaningful and timely input by state 

and local elected officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have federalism implications. 

‘‘Federalism implications’’ means 

substantial direct effects 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. The proposed 

regulations do not have federalism 

implications. 

Accessible Format: On request to the 

program contact person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, 

individuals with disabilities can obtain 

this document in an accessible format. 

The Department will provide the 

requestor with an accessible format that 

may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or 

text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 

file, braille, large print, audiotape, or 

compact disc, or other accessible format. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. You may access the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the 

Code of Federal Regulations at 

www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can 

view this document, as well as all other 

documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or 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. 

List of Subjects 

34 CFR Part 662 

Colleges and universities, Educational 

research, Educational study programs, 

Grant programs—education, 

Scholarships and fellowships. 

34 CFR Part 663 

Colleges and universities, Educational 

research, Educational study programs, 

Grant programs—education, 

Scholarships and fellowships, Teachers. 

Miguel A. Cardona, 

Secretary of Education. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Secretary amends parts 

662 and 663 of title 34 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 662—FULBRIGHT-HAYS 

DOCTORAL DISSERTATION 

RESEARCH ABROAD FELLOWSHIP 

PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 662 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Section 102(b)(6) of the 

Fulbright-Hays Act, 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6), 

unless otherwise noted. 

■ 2. Add § 662.8 to subpart A to read as 

follows: 

§ 662.8 Severability. 

If any provision of this part or its 

application to any person, act, or 

practice is held invalid, the remainder 

of the part or the application of its 

provisions to any person, act, or practice 

will not be affected thereby. 

■ 3. Amend § 662.21 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraphs (c) 

introductory text and (c)(3); 

■ b. Redesignating paragraph (c)(4) as 

(c)(5); and 

■ c. Adding a new paragraph (c)(4). 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 662.21 What criteria does the Secretary 

use to evaluate an application for a 

fellowship? 

* * * * * 

(c) Qualifications of the applicant. 

The Secretary reviews each application 

to determine the qualifications of the 

applicant. In coordination with any 

priorities established under paragraph 

(d) of this section, the Secretary 

considers one or more of the 

following— 

* * * * * 

(3) The applicant’s proficiency in one 

or more of the languages (other than 

English) of the host country or countries 

of research; 

(4) The extent to which the 

applicant’s academic record 

demonstrates steps taken to further 

improve advanced language proficiency 

to overcome any anticipated language 

barriers relative to the proposed 

research project; 

* * * * * 

PART 663—FULBRIGHT-HAYS 

FACULTY RESEARCH ABROAD 

FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 663 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Section 102(b)(6) of the 

Fulbright-Hays Act, 22 U.S.C. 2452(b)(6), 

unless otherwise noted. 

■ 5. Add § 663.8 to subpart A to read as 

follows: 

§ 663.8 Severability. 

If any provision of this part or its 

application to any person, act, or 

practice is held invalid, the remainder 

of the part or the application of its 

provisions to any person, act, or practice 

will not be affected thereby. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
85508 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 6. Amend § 663.21 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraphs (c) 

introductory text and (c)(3); 

■ b. Redesignating paragraph (c)(4) as 

(c)(5); and 

■ c. Adding a new paragraph (c)(4). 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 663.21 What criteria does the Secretary 

use to evaluate an application for a 

fellowship? 

* * * * * 

(c) Qualifications of the applicant. 

The Secretary reviews each application 

to determine the qualifications of the 

applicant. In coordination with any 

priorities established under paragraph 

(d) of this section, the Secretary 

considers one or more of the 

following— 

* * * * * 

(3) The applicant’s proficiency in one 

or more of the languages (other than 

English) of the host country or countries 

of research; 

(4) The extent to which the 

applicant’s academic record 

demonstrates steps taken to further 

improve advanced language proficiency 

to overcome any anticipated language 

barriers relative to the proposed 

research project; 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2023–26991 Filed 12–7–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

POSTAL SERVICE 

39 CFR Part 111 

New Mailing Standards for Domestic 

Mailing Services Products 

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: On October 6, 2023, the Postal 

Service (USPS®) filed a notice of 

mailing services price adjustments with 

the Postal Regulatory Commission 

(PRC), effective January 21, 2024. This 

final rule contains the revisions to 

Mailing Standards of the United States 

Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual 

(DMM®) to implement the changes 

coincident with the price adjustments 

and other minor DMM changes. 

DATES: Effective January 21, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doriane Harley at (202) 268–2537 or 

Dale Kennedy at (202) 268–6592. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 22, 2023, the PRC favorably 

reviewed the price adjustments 

proposed by the Postal Service. The 

price adjustments and DMM revisions 

are scheduled to become effective on 

January 21, 2024. Final prices are 

available under Docket No. R2024–1 

(Order No. 6814) on the Postal 

Regulatory Commission’s website at 

www.prc.gov. 

Certificate of Mailing—Automated 

Solution 

Currently, Certificate of Mailing is 

processed manually at the BMEU for 

individual pieces of Priority Mail®, 

First-Class Mail®, USPS Marketing 

Mail®, and Package Services. Certificate 

of Mailing provides evidence of mailing 

only and does not provide a record of 

delivery. 

The Postal Service is adding an 

automated option for processing forms 

3606–D Certificate of Bulk Mailing; 

3665 Certificate of Mailing; and 3877 

Firm Mailing Book for Accountable Mail 

at the BMEU when electronically 

uploaded to PostalOne! and payment 

via EPS (Enterprise Payment System). 

Promotion Eligible Product 

Identification 

Currently, mailers are unable to see 

the discount breakdown at product level 

for each promotion; in addition, when a 

new promotion is added or an existing 

promotion is enhanced, changes applied 

to the product line is not readily 

available to mailers. 

The Postal Service will implement an 

update that will enable mailers to see 

promotion discounts at the product 

level for each promotion as well as 

ensure all updates are applied to 

applicable systems in sync. 

These revisions will provide 

consistency within postal products and 

add value for customers. 

Market Dominant comments on 

Proposed changes and USPS responses. 

The Postal Service did not receive any 

formal comments on the October 2023 

proposed rule (88 FR 71329–71332). 

The Postal Service adopts the 

described changes to Mailing Standards 

of the United States Postal Service, 

Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), 

incorporated by reference in the Code of 

Federal Regulations. We will publish an 

appropriate amendment to 39 CFR part 

111 to reflect these changes. 

List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Postal Service. 

Accordingly, 39 CFR part 111 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 111—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR 

part 111 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 13 U.S.C. 301– 

307; 18 U.S.C. 1692–1737; 39 U.S.C. 101, 

401, 403, 404, 414, 416, 3001–3011, 3201– 

3219, 3403–3406, 3621, 3622, 3626, 3632, 

3633, and 5001. 

■ 2. Revise the Mailing Standards of the 

United States Postal Service, Domestic 

Mail Manual (DMM) as follows: 

Mailing Standards of the United States 

Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual 

(DMM) 

* * * * * 

203 Basic Postage Statement, 

Documentation, and Preparation 

Standards 

* * * * * 

3.0 Standardized Documentation for 

First-Class Mail, Periodicals, USPS 

Marketing Mail, and Flat-Size Bound 

Printed Matter 

* * * * * 

3.2 Format and Content 

For First-Class Mail, Periodicals, 

USPS Marketing Mail, and Bound 

Printed Matter, standardized 

documentation includes: 

* * * * * 

c. For mail in trays or sacks, list these 

required elements: 

* * * * * 

[Revise item 203.3.2c(6) to read as 

follows:] 

6. For all Periodicals mailings, 

include a separate ‘‘Entry’’ column 

showing the applicable destination 

entry discount for those copies using the 

entry abbreviations in 3.6.3. 

* * * * * 

d. For bundles on pallets, list these 

required elements: 

* * * * * 

[Revise item 203.3.2d(6) to read as 

follows:] 

6. For all Periodicals mailings, 

include a separate ‘‘Entry’’ column 

showing the entry discount for those 

copies using the abbreviations in 

207.17.4.3. Report foreign copies 

separately. 

* * * * * 

[Revise the first sentence of the 

introductory text of 203.3.2(e) to read as 

follows:] 

e. At the end of the documentation, a 

summary report of the number of pieces 

mailed at each price for each mailing by 

postage payment method and the 

number of pieces in each mailing.* * * 

* * * * * 

[Revise the first sentence of item 

203.3.2e(4) to read as follows:] 

4. A summary of the number of copies 

for each entry price.* * * 

* * * * * 

[Revise the heading of 3.6 to read as 

follows:] 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES