4522 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

The FAA has determined that this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 

regulations for which frequent and 

routine amendments are necessary to 

keep them operationally current. It, 

therefore: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant 

rule’’ under Department of 

Transportation (DOT) Regulatory 

Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; 

February 26, 1979); and (3) does not 

warrant preparation of a regulatory 

evaluation as the anticipated impact is 

so minimal. Since this is a routine 

matter that will only affect air traffic 

procedures and air navigation, it is 

certified that this proposed rule, when 

promulgated, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

Environmental Review 

This proposal will be subject to an 

environmental analysis in accordance 

with FAA Order 1050.1F, 

‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final 

regulatory action. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as 

follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 71 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 

40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 

1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 10, 2021, and 

effective September 15, 2021, is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 6010 (a)—Domestic VOR Federal 

Airways. 

* * * * * 

V–356 [Amended] 

From Red Table, CO; to INT Red Table 058° 

(T) 046° (M) and Kremmling, CO 190° (T) 

176° (M) radials. From INT Gill, CO 211° 

(T) 198° (M) and Mile High, CO 265° (T) 

257° (M) radials; to Mile High. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 25, 

2022. 

Michael R. Beckles, 

Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations 

Group. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01719 Filed 1–27–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter II 

[Docket ID ED–2021–OESE–0122] 

Proposed Priorities, Requirements, 

and Definition—Project Prevent Grant 

Program 

AGENCY: Office of Elementary and 

Secondary Education, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Proposed priorities, 

requirements, and definition. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Education 

(Department) proposes priorities, 

requirements, and a definition under the 

Project Prevent grant program, 

Assistance Listing Number (ALN) 

84.184M. We may use one or more of 

these priorities, requirements, and 

definition for competitions in fiscal year 

(FY) 2022 and later years. We propose 

priorities and requirements designed to 

direct funds toward local educational 

agencies (LEAs) impacted by 

community violence and to expand the 

capacity of LEAs to implement 

community- and school-based strategies 

to help prevent community violence 

and mitigate the impacts of exposure to 

community violence. The Department 

also proposes to define ‘‘community 

violence’’ for purposes of the Project 

Prevent grant program. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before February 28, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

or via postal mail, commercial delivery, 

or hand delivery. We will not accept 

comments submitted by fax or by email 

or those submitted after the comment 

period. To ensure we do not receive 

duplicate copies, please submit your 

comments only once. In addition, please 

include the Docket ID at the top of your 

comments. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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 ‘‘FAQ.’’ 

• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, 

or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver 

your comments about the proposed 

priorities, requirements, and definition, 

address them to Nicole White, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW, Room 3E326, Washington, 

DC 20202. 

Privacy Note: The Department’s 

policy is to make all comments received 

from members of the public available for 

public viewing in their entirety on the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov. Therefore, 

commenters should be careful to 

include in their comments only 

information that they wish to make 

publicly available. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nicole White, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

Room 3E326, Washington, DC 20202. 

Telephone: (202) 453–6729. Email: 

Project.Prevent@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: 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding the 

proposed priorities, requirements, and 

definition. To ensure that your 

comments have maximum effect in 

developing the notice of final priorities, 

requirements, and definition, we urge 

you to clearly identify the specific 

section of the proposed priorities, 

requirements, or definition that each 

comment addresses. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Orders 12866 

and 13563 and their overall requirement 

of reducing regulatory burden that 

might result from the proposed 

priorities, requirements, and definition. 

Please let us know of any further ways 

we could reduce potential costs or 

increase potential benefits while 

preserving the effective and efficient 

administration of the program. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about the proposed priorities, 

requirements, and definition by 

accessing Regulations.gov. You may also 

inspect the comments in person. Please 

contact the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to make 

arrangements to inspect the comments 

in person. 

Assistance to Individuals with 

Disabilities in Reviewing the 

Rulemaking Record: On request we will 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 4523 

1Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

(2020, April 3). Adverse Childhood Experiences 

(ACEs). Retrieved from: www.cdc.gov/ 

violenceprevention/aces/riskprotectivefactors.html. 

2National Center for Injury Prevention and 

Control, Division of Violence Prevention. Retrieved 

from: www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention. 

3U.S. Department of Justice. (2012). Report of the 

Attorney General’s National Task Force on Children 

Exposed to Violence. Retrieved from: https://

www.justice.gov/archives/defendingchildhood/taskforce-children-exposed-violence. 

4Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services 

Administration. (2012). SAMHSA’s Working 

Definition of Trauma and Principles and Guidance 

for a Trauma-Informed Approach. Retrieved from: 

SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a 

Trauma-Informed Approach. 

5U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 

Crime and Violence—Healthy People 2030. 

Retrieved from: https://health.gov/healthypeople/ 

objectives-and-data/social-determinants-health/ 

literature-summaries/crime-and-violence. 

6Break the Cycle of Violence Act, S. 2275, 117th 

Cong. (2021). Retrieved from: https://

www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-117s2275is/ 

html/BILLS-117s2275is.htm. 

7Chicago Lab Crime Report. Retrieved from: 

https://www.youth-guidance.org/bam/. 

8The White House. FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris 

Administration Announces Initial Actions to 

Address the Gun Violence Public Health Epidemic. 

Retrieved from: https://www.whitehouse.gov/ 

briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/07/factsheet-biden-harris-administration-announcesinitial-actions-to-address-the-gun-violence-publichealth-epidemic/. 

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 the proposed priorities, 

requirements, and definition. 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. 

Purpose of Program: The Project 

Prevent grant program provides grants 

to LEAs to increase their capacity to 

implement community- and schoolbased strategies to help prevent 

community violence and mitigate the 

impacts of exposure to community 

violence. Project Prevent grant funds 

allow LEAs to increase their capacity to 

identify, assess, and serve students 

exposed to community violence, 

helping LEAs to (1) offer affected 

students mental health services; (2) 

support conflict management programs; 

and (3) implement other communityand school-based strategies to help 

prevent community violence and to 

mitigate the impacts of exposure to 

community violence. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7281. 

Background: Children and youth’s 

exposure to community violence, 

whether as victims, justice-involved 

youth, or witnesses, is often associated 

with long-term physical, psychological, 

and emotional harms. Research has 

demonstrated that community violence 

is a risk factor for experiencing an 

adverse childhood experience (ACE) 

such as abuse, neglect, witnessing 

violence, or having a family member 

who is incarcerated, and has an impact 

on future violence and victimization in 

a community.1 ACEs can lead children 

and youth to experience depression, 

anxiety, and post-traumatic stress 

disorder; have difficulty in, or 

disconnect from, school and the 

workforce; and engage in delinquency 

or violent acts, potentially perpetuating 

the conditions that contribute to a cycle 

of community violence. 

Several Federal agencies have worked 

to address the issues surrounding 

children and youth’s exposure to 

community violence. Since 1980, the 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention has been studying patterns 

of violence and the effects of violence 

on communities and individuals, as 

well as advancing strategies to help 

prevent violence and mitigate the 

impacts of exposure to violence.2

Furthermore, in 2010, Attorney General 

Eric Holder launched the Defending 

Childhood initiative to better 

understand and address the problem of 

children’s exposure to community 

violence. As part of this initiative, in 

December 2012 the Attorney General’s 

Task Force on Children Exposed to 

Violence released a report and national 

action plan that has helped inform the 

development of this program. The report 

recognized the duty of local coalitions 

of professionals from multiple 

disciplines across the full range of 

service systems (health care, schools, 

family services, law enforcement, and 

child advocacy centers), as well as 

families and other community members, 

to assess local challenges and resources, 

and develop strategies to reduce 

violence and the number of children 

exposed to violence.3

In addition, in 2012 the U.S. 

Department of Health and Human 

Services launched a national effort to 

‘‘reduce the pervasive, harmful, and 

costly health impact of community 

violence and trauma by integrating 

trauma-informed approaches throughout 

health, behavioral health, and related 

systems and addressing the behavioral 

health needs of people involved in or at 

risk of involvement in the criminal and 

juvenile justice systems.’’ This includes 

the outlining of ‘‘Principles and 

Guidance for a Trauma-Informed 

Approach.’’ 4

Community violence, which is 

defined in this document, is a 

significant public health, public safety, 

and community infrastructure concern 

nationwide and is a leading cause of 

death, injury, and intergenerational 

trauma for people in the United States. 

Community violence imposes enormous 

human, social, and economic costs, 

including disruption to employment 

and hindering of a community’s social 

and economic development.5 While the 

vast majority of young people are able 

to persevere, those who have been 

victims of violence are at substantially 

higher risk of being violently 

revictimized or killed. Additionally, 

both direct and indirect violence 

exposure have been associated with 

poor economic outcomes and poor 

health outcomes, including chronic 

illness, anxiety, depression, and 

substance use.6

Programs facilitated in schools by 

counselors, mental health providers, 

and community leaders for students 

who have been exposed to or are at high 

risk of involvement in community 

violence have been shown to help 

students develop the social and 

emotional skills needed to navigate 

difficult circumstances outside of the 

classroom so that they are able to turn 

away from violence and reengage in 

school.7 When properly implemented 

and consistently funded, coordinated, 

community-based strategies that use 

trauma-responsive care and interrupt 

cycles of community violence may 

produce lifesaving and cost-saving 

results in a short period of time. These 

strategies identify those at the highest 

risk and highest need, coordinate 

individualized wraparound resources, 

provide pathways to healing and 

stability, and monitor and support longterm success. 

The Biden-Harris Administration is 

taking a number of steps to prioritize 

investment in community violence 

interventions. Community violence 

interventions are proven strategies for 

reducing gun violence and other violent 

crime in urban communities through 

approaches other than incarceration.8

These approaches include outreach, 

conflict mediation, violence 

interruption, and trauma-informed 

school-based mental health services to 

effectively reduce community violence. 

Efforts to ensure public safety and 

reduce community violence may also be 

carried out collaboratively and in 

partnership with law enforcement, 

where appropriate, to build safer, 

thriving communities. 

Proposed Priorities 

The Department proposes the 

following three priorities for this 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
4524 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

9U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Crime and Violence—Healthy People 2030. 

Retrieved from: https://health.gov/healthypeople/ 

objectives-and-data/social-determinants-health/ 

literature-summaries/crime-and-violence. 

10U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, Neighborhood and Built Environment— 

Healthy People 2030. Retrieved from: https:// 

health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/ 

browse-objectives/neighborhood-and-builtenvironment. 

11U.S. Government Accountability Office, 

Characteristics of School Shootings. Retrieved from: 

https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-20-455.pdf. 

program. We may apply one or more of 

these priorities in any year in which this 

program is in effect. 

Proposed Priority 1—Addressing the 

Impacts of Community Violence. 

Background: In Proposed Priority 1, 

the Department recognizes the 

tremendous impact community violence 

has on the well-being of students. 

Children and youth exposed to violence 

are at risk for poor long-term behavioral 

and mental health outcomes regardless 

of whether they are victims, justiceinvolved youth, direct witnesses, or 

hear about the crime. For example, 

children and youth exposed to violence 

may experience behavioral health 

challenges, depression, anxiety, and 

post-traumatic stress disorder, which 

can negatively affect educational 

outcomes. Children and youth exposed 

to violence may also show increased 

signs of aggression starting in upperelementary school.9

Schools are often the center of the 

community for students and their 

families, providing students with the 

resources and referrals they need to 

meet their full potential. Consequently, 

the needs of children and youth often 

are best met through cross-agency 

collaboration and partnerships between 

schools and organizations in the 

community. Consistent with the 

Secretary’s vision for community 

engagement to advance systemic 

change, the Department would use this 

priority to emphasize the importance 

and efficacy of a coordinated effort 

between schools and communities to 

lessen the short- and long-term effects 

that community violence has on 

students. 

Proposed Priority: Projects that 

implement community- and schoolbased strategies to help prevent 

community violence and mitigate the 

impacts of children and youth’s 

exposure to community violence in 

collaboration with local communitybased organizations (e.g., local civic or 

community service organizations, local 

faith-based organizations, or local 

foundations or non-profit organizations) 

and include community and family 

engagement in the implementation of 

the strategies. 

Proposed Priority 2—Established 

Partnership with a Local CommunityBased Organization. 

Background: As described in the 

background to Proposed Priority 1, the 

needs of children and youth often are 

often best met through cross-agency 

collaboration and partnerships between 

schools and organizations in the 

community. In forging this 

collaboration, the Department places 

specific emphasis on the importance of 

structured and defined partnerships to 

efficiently and effectively implement 

community- and school-based 

intervention strategies to help prevent 

community violence and mitigate the 

impacts of exposures to community 

violence. In particular, memorandums 

of agreement (MOA) and memorandums 

of understanding (MOUs) signed by the 

authorized representative of a local 

community-based organization elevate 

the level of partnership between an LEA 

and a partner organization by clearly 

defining the roles, responsibilities, and 

resources that each entity will bring to 

the partnership. 

We may use this priority as a 

complement to Proposed Priority 1 or 

other priorities for this program, or as a 

stand-alone priority. 

Proposed Priority: An application that 

includes at least one memorandum of 

agreement (MOA) or memorandum of 

understanding (MOU) signed by the 

authorized representative of a local 

community-based organization that 

agrees to partner with the applicant on 

the proposed project and provide 

resources or administer services that are 

likely to substantially contribute to 

positive outcomes for the proposed 

project. The MOA or MOU must clearly 

delineate the roles and responsibilities 

of each entity. 

Proposed Priority 3—Supporting 

Children and Youth from Low-Income 

Backgrounds. 

Background: The neighborhoods 

where children and youth live and go to 

school can have a major impact on their 

health and well-being. Many children 

and youth in the United States live in 

neighborhoods with high rates of, and 

prevalence of risk factors associated 

with, violence-related injuries and 

deaths, crime, poverty, and other health 

and safety risks. Students from lowincome backgrounds are more likely to 

live in places with these risks.10 In a 

study that examined the characteristics 

of school shootings, the Government 

Accountability Office found that the 

number of school shootings generally 

increased relative to school poverty 

level.11 Proposed Priority 3 is intended 

to allow the Department to support 

activities in LEAs that experience and 

are impacted by community violence at 

a disproportionate rate. 

Proposed Priority: In its application, 

an applicant must demonstrate, based 

on Small Area Income and Poverty 

Estimates (SAIPE) data from the U.S. 

Census Bureau or, for an LEA for which 

SAIPE data are not available, the same 

State-derived equivalent of SAIPE data 

that the State uses to make allocations 

under part A of title I of the Elementary 

and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 

as amended (ESEA), one or more of the 

following: 

(a) At least 25 percent of the students 

enrolled in the LEA to be served by the 

proposed project are from families with 

an income below the poverty line. 

(b) At least 30 percent of the students 

enrolled in the LEA to be served by the 

proposed project are from families with 

an income below the poverty line. 

(c) At least 35 percent of the students 

enrolled in the LEA to be served by the 

proposed project are from families with 

an income below the poverty line. 

(d) At least 40 percent of the students 

enrolled in the LEA to be served by the 

proposed project are from families with 

an income below the poverty line. 

(e) At least 45 percent of the students 

enrolled in the LEA to be served by the 

proposed project are from families with 

an income below the poverty line. 

Types of Priorities: When inviting 

applications for a competition using one 

or more priorities, we designate the type 

of each priority as absolute, competitive 

preference, or invitational through a 

notice in the Federal Register. The 

effect of each type of priority follows: 

Absolute priority: Under an absolute 

priority, we consider only applications 

that meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3)). 

Competitive preference priority: 

Under a competitive preference priority, 

we give competitive preference to an 

application by (1) awarding additional 

points, depending on the extent to 

which the application meets the priority 

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

an application that meets the priority 

over an application of comparable merit 

that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 

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

Invitational priority: Under an 

invitational priority we are particularly 

interested in applications that meet the 

priority. However, we do not give an 

application that meets the priority a 

preference over other applications (34 

CFR 75.105(c)(1)). 

Proposed Requirements 

The Department proposes the 

following program requirement and 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 4525 

application requirements for this 

program. We may apply one or more of 

these requirements in any year in which 

the program is in effect. 

Proposed Program Requirement: 

Eligible Applicants: Eligible 

applicants for this program are local 

educational agencies (LEAs), as defined 

in 20 U.S.C. 7801(30). 

Proposed Application Requirements: 

(a) Severity and magnitude of the 

problem; identification of schools to be 

served by the proposed project. 

Applicants must— 

(1) Identify the schools proposed to be 

served by project activities; 

(2) Describe the community violence 

that affects students in those schools, 

including collaborating and 

coordinating with organizations and law 

enforcement (where appropriate), and 

with other organizations to utilize data 

and information such as incidents of 

community violence, gun crime and 

other violent crime, rates of child abuse 

and neglect, and other school and 

community crime and safety data, 

including on a per capita basis (such as 

homicides per 100,000 persons); 

prevalence of risk factors associated 

with violence-related injuries and 

deaths; findings from student mental 

health screenings or assessments, school 

climate surveys, and student 

engagement surveys; demographic data 

provided by U.S. Census surveys; and 

other relevant data and information; and 

(3) Provide a comparison of the school 

and community data cited to similar 

data at the State or local level, if 

available. 

(b) Collaboration and coordination 

with community-based organizations. 

Applicants must— 

(1) Describe how they intend to work 

collaboratively with community-based 

organizations to achieve project goals 

and objectives; 

(2) Provide evidence of collaboration 

and coordination through letters of 

support, memoranda of agreement, or 

memoranda of understanding from at 

least one community-based 

organization; and 

(3) Describe how they will use grant 

program funds to supplement, rather 

than supplant, existing or new efforts to 

reduce community violence and 

mitigate the direct and indirect effects of 

community violence on students. 

(c) Project activities. Applicants must 

propose to conduct three or more of the 

following: 

(1) Appropriately tailored 

professional development opportunities 

for LEA and school mental health staff 

(e.g., counselors, psychologists, and 

social workers), other specialized 

instructional support personnel, and 

other school staff, as appropriate, on 

how to screen for and respond to 

violence-related trauma and implement 

appropriate school-based interventions 

to help prevent community violence 

and mitigate the impacts of children and 

youth’s exposure to community 

violence. 

(2) Activities designed to improve the 

range, availability, and quality of 

school-based mental health services by 

hiring school and clinical psychologists, 

school counselors, or school social 

workers with expertise or training in 

violence prevention, trauma-informed 

care, and healing-centered strategies, 

and qualified to respond to the mental 

and behavioral health needs of students 

who have experienced trauma as a 

result of exposure to community 

violence. 

(3) Training for school staff (e.g., 

teachers, administrators, specialized 

instructional support personnel, and 

support staff), community partners, 

youth, and families on the effects of 

exposure to community violence, the 

importance of screening students, and 

how to screen and provide interventions 

to students exposed to community 

violence. 

(4) Developing or improving processes 

to better target services to students who 

are exposed to community violence and 

to assess such students who may be 

experiencing mental, social, emotional, 

or behavioral challenges. 

(5) Enhancing linkages between LEA 

mental health services and community 

mental health systems to help ensure 

affected students receive referrals to 

treatment as appropriate. 

(6) Undertaking activities in 

collaboration and coordination with law 

enforcement to address community 

violence affecting students, to support 

victims’ rights, and to promote public 

safety. 

(d) Evidence-based, culturally 

competent, and developmentally 

appropriate programs and practices. 

Applicants must— 

(1) Describe the continuum of 

evidence-based, culturally competent, 

and developmentally appropriate (as 

defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)) programs and 

practices that will be implemented at 

the school and community level and 

how these programs and practices will 

be organized to provide differentiated 

support based on student need, to help 

break the cycle of community violence. 

These programs and practices must 

include all of the following: 

(i) Interventions and activities that are 

available to all students in a school with 

the goal of preventing negative or 

violent behavior (such as harassment, 

bullying, fighting, gang participation, 

sexual assault, and substance abuse) and 

enhancing student knowledge and 

interpersonal and emotional skills 

regarding positive behavior (such as 

communication and problem-solving, 

empathy, and conflict management, deescalation, and mediation). 

(ii) Interventions and activities related 

to positive coping techniques, anger 

management, conflict management, deescalation, and mediation, promotion of 

positive behavior, and development of 

protective factors. 

(iii) Interventions and services, such 

as mentorship programming, that target 

individual students who are at a higher 

risk for committing or being a victim of 

violence. 

(2) Describe the research and evidence 

supporting the proposed programs and 

practices and the expected effects on the 

target population. 

(e) Framework for planning, 

implementation, and sustainability. 

Applicants must— 

(1) Describe how the proposed project 

is integrated and aligned with the 

mission and vision of the LEA, 

including a description of the 

relationship of the project to the LEA’s 

existing school safety or related plan; 

(2) Describe the anticipated 

challenges to success of the project and 

how they will be addressed, such as 

sustaining project implementation 

beyond the availability of grant funds 

and mitigating turnover at the LEA 

leadership, school leadership, and staff 

levels; and 

(3) Include a timeline of activities 

for— 

(i) Planning that includes: Conducting 

a needs assessment that is 

comprehensive and examines areas for 

improvement, both within the school 

and the community, related to learning 

conditions that create a safe and healthy 

environment for students; creating a 

logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1); 

completing resource mapping; selecting 

evidence-based, culturally competent, 

and developmentally appropriate 

programs; developing evaluation plans; 

and engaging community and school 

partners, families, and other 

stakeholders; 

(ii) Implementation that includes: 

Training on and execution of evidencebased, culturally competent, and 

developmentally appropriate programs; 

continuing engagement with 

stakeholders; communicating and 

collaborating strategically with 

community partners; and evaluating 

program implementation; and 

(iii) Sustainability that includes: 

Further developing and expanding on 

the project’s successes beyond the end 

of the grant, at the school and 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
4526 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

community levels, in alignment with 

other related efforts. 

(f) Planning period. Projects funded 

under this program may use up to 12 

months during the first year of the 

project period for program planning. 

Applicants that propose a planning 

period must provide sufficient 

justification for why this program 

planning time is necessary, provide the 

intended outcomes of program planning 

in Year 1, and include a description of 

the proposed strategies and activities to 

be supported. 

Proposed Definition 

The Department proposes to establish 

a definition of ‘‘community violence’’ 

for use in this program. We may apply 

it in any year in which this program is 

in effect. 

Community violence means firearm 

injuries, assaults, homicides, and other 

acts of interpersonal violence 

committed outside the context of a 

familial or romantic relationship. 

Final Priorities, Requirements, and 

Definition: We will announce the final 

priorities, requirements, and definition 

in a document published in the Federal 

Register. We will determine the final 

priorities, requirements, and definition 

after considering responses to the 

proposed priorities, requirements, and 

definition and other information 

available to the Department. This 

document does not preclude us from 

proposing additional priorities, 

requirements, definitions, or selection 

criteria, subject to meeting applicable 

rulemaking requirements. 

Note: This document does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we choose 

to use the priorities, requirements, and 

definition, we invite applications through a 

notice inviting applications in the Federal 

Register. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Under Executive Order 12866, it must 

be determined 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 proposed 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 proposed 

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 

on 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 the proposed 

priorities, requirements, and definition 

only on a reasoned determination that 

their benefits would justify their costs. 

In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, we selected 

those approaches that would maximize 

net benefits. Based on an analysis of 

anticipated costs and benefits, we 

believe that the proposed priorities, 

requirements, and definition are 

consistent with the principles in 

Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action does not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and Tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with the 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. 

Potential Costs and Benefits 

The Department believes that this 

proposed regulatory action would not 

impose significant costs on eligible 

entities, whose participation in our 

programs is voluntary, and costs can 

generally be covered with grant funds. 

As a result, the proposed priorities, 

requirements, and definition would not 

impose any particular burden except 

when an entity voluntarily elects to 

apply for a grant. The proposed 

priorities, requirements, and definition 

would help ensure that the Project 

Prevent grants program selects highquality applicants to implement 

activities that meet the goals of the 

program. We believe these benefits 

would outweigh any associated costs. 

Clarity of the Regulations 

Executive Order 12866 and the 

Presidential memorandum ‘‘Plain 

Language in Government Writing’’ 

require each agency to write regulations 

that are easy to understand. 

The Secretary invites comments on 

how to make the proposed priorities, 

requirements, and definition easier to 

understand, including answers to 

questions such as the following: 

• Are the requirements in the 

proposed regulations clearly stated? 

• Do the proposed regulations contain 

technical terms or other wording that 

interferes with their clarity? 

• Does the format of the proposed 

regulations (grouping and order of 

sections, use of headings, paragraphing, 

etc.) aid or reduce their clarity? 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 4527 

12See http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_

nat.htm. 

• Would the proposed regulations be 

easier to understand if we divided them 

into more (but shorter) sections? 

• Could the description of the 

proposed regulations in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this preamble be more helpful in 

making the proposed regulations easier 

to understand? If so, how? 

• What else could we do to make the 

proposed regulations easier to 

understand? 

To send any comments that concern 

how the Department could make the 

proposed priorities, requirements, and 

definition easier to understand, see the 

instructions in the ADDRESSES section. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 

part 79. One of the objectives of the 

Executive order is to foster an 

intergovernmental partnership and a 

strengthened federalism. The Executive 

order relies on processes developed by 

State and local governments for 

coordination and review of proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 

The Secretary certifies that this 

proposed regulatory action would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The U.S. Small Business Administration 

Size Standards define proprietary 

institutions as small businesses if they 

are independently owned and operated, 

are not dominant in their field of 

operation, and have total annual 

revenue below $7,000,000. Nonprofit 

institutions are defined as small entities 

if they are independently owned and 

operated and not dominant in their field 

of operation. Public institutions are 

defined as small organizations if they 

are operated by a government 

overseeing a population below 50,000. 

The small entities that this proposed 

regulatory action would affect are LEAs. 

Of the impacts we estimate accruing to 

grantees or eligible entities, all are 

voluntary. Therefore, we do not believe 

that the proposed priorities, 

requirements, and definition would 

significantly impact small entities 

beyond the potential for increasing the 

likelihood of their applying for, and 

receiving, competitive grants from the 

Department. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

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 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This helps 

ensure that the public understands the 

Department’s collection instructions, 

respondents 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. 

The proposed requirements contain 

information collection requirements. 

Under the PRA the Department has 

submitted these requirements to OMB 

for its 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 the 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 the notice of final priorities, 

requirements, and definition we will 

display the control number assigned by 

OMB to any information collection 

proposed in this document and adopted 

in the notice of final priorities, 

requirements, and definition. 

For the years that the Department 

holds a Project Prevent grant 

competition, we estimate 150 LEAs will 

apply and submit an application. We 

estimate that it will take each LEA 40 

hours to complete and submit the 

application, including time for 

reviewing instructions, searching 

existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and 

completing and reviewing the collection 

of information. The total burden hour 

estimate for this collection is 6,000 

hours. At $97.28 per hour (using mean 

wages for Education and Childcare 

Administrators 12 and assuming the total 

cost of labor, including benefits and 

overhead, is equal to 200 percent of the 

mean wage rate), the total estimated cost 

for 150 LEAs to complete the Project 

Prevent application is approximately 

$583,680. 

Consistent with 5 CFR 1320.8(d), the 

Department is soliciting comments on 

the information collection. We must 

receive your comments on the collection 

activities contained in these proposed 

priorities, requirements, and definition 

on or before February 28, 2022. 

Comments related to the information 

collection activities must be submitted 

electronically through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov by selecting the 

Docket ID number ED–2021–OESE–0122 

or via postal mail, commercial delivery, 

or hand delivery by referencing the 

Docket ID number and the title of the 

information collection request at the top 

of your comment. Comments submitted 

by postal mail or delivery should be 

addressed to the PRA Coordinator of the 

Strategic Collections and Clearance 

Governance and Strategy Division, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Ave. SW, LBJ, Room 6W208D, 

Washington, DC 20202–8240. 

Note: The Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs and the Department 

review all comments related to the 

information collection activities posted at 

www.regulations.gov. 

COLLECTION OF INFORMATION

Information collection activity 

Estimated 

number of 

responses 

Hours per 

response 

Total 

estimated 

burden hours 

Estimated 

cost at an 

hourly rate 

of $97.28 

Project Prevent Application ............................................................................. 150 40 6,000 $583,680 

We consider your comments on this 

proposed collection of information in— 

• Deciding whether the proposed 

collection is necessary for the proper 

performance of our functions, including 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
4528 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

1A ‘‘fuel burning unit’’ is defined as ‘‘each unit, 

or any combination of units discharging to a 

common stack used for the burning of fuel or other 

combustible material for the primary purpose of 

utilizing the thermal energy released.’’ This 

definition is included in the Delaware SIP at 40 

CFR 52.420(c). 

2Although this provision remains in the 

underlying Delaware regulations, because Delaware 

withdrew this provision from its SIP revision, it is 

not and will not be incorporated into the Delaware 

SIP. Consequently, EPA would not recognize any 

alternate emissions control approved by Delaware 

pursuant to this provision as a means of complying 

with the federally approved SIP. 

whether the information will have 

practical use; 

• Evaluating the accuracy of our 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

collection, including the validity of our 

methodology and assumptions; 

• Enhancing the quality, usefulness, 

and clarity of the information we 

collect; and 

• Minimizing the burden on those 

who must respond. This includes 

exploring the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques. 

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 the 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. 

Ian Rosenblum, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Programs. Delegated the authority to perform 

the functions and duties of the Assistant 

Secretary, Office of Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01611 Filed 1–27–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0204; FRL–9440–01– 

R3] 

Air Plan Approval; Delaware; Revision 

of Regulation for Sulfur Content of 

Fuel Oil 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

state implementation plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Delaware. This 

revision pertains to the reduction of the 

maximum allowable sulfur content limit 

for distillate fuels, from a current limit 

of 3,000 parts per million (ppm) (0.3% 

by weight) to 15 ppm (0.0015% by 

weight) and residential fuels from a 

current limit of 1.0% by weight to 0.5% 

by weight. This revision also adds 

requirements for sampling and testing 

along with certification and 

recordkeeping. Additionally, start up, 

shut down and malfunction provisions 

that were previously included in the 

Delaware SIP have been removed in this 

revision. EPA is proposing to determine 

that such removal corrects a deficiency 

identified in the June 12, 2015, SIP call 

issued to Delaware. This action is being 

taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before February 28, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2014–0204 at https://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

gordon.mike@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

confidential business information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mallory Moser, Planning & 

Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & 

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. The telephone number is 215– 

814–2030. Ms. Moser can also be 

reached via electronic mail at 

moser.mallory@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 

10, 2013, the Delaware Department of 

Natural Resources and Environmental 

Control (DNREC) submitted a revision to 

the Delaware SIP which comprises 

revisions to Title 7 of Delaware’s 

Administrative Code (7 DE Admin. 

Code) 1108—Sulfur Dioxide Emissions 

from Fuel Burning Equipment. The 

revision to 7 DE Admin. Code 1108 will 

reduce the amount of sulfur in fuel oils 

used in fuel burning units.1 The revised 

regulation also establishes the date of 

compliance and adds necessary record 

keeping and recording provisions to 

ensure compliance with the regulation. 

The revision removes start up, shut 

down and malfunction provisions that 

were previously included in the 

Delaware SIP. On August 19, 2016, EPA 

received a supplemental letter from 

DNREC withdrawing a portion of 

Section 3.0 of 7 DE Admin. Code 1108 

from the July 10, 2013, SIP submittal 

subject to EPA’s review. The portion 

removed from the 2013 submittal is the 

last sentence of Section 3.0 which 

states, ‘‘In order to employ an emission 

control rather than sulfur content limits 

as a means of complying with this 

Regulation, an owner or operator of fuel 

burning equipment must demonstrate to 

the Department in advance that the 

equivalent emission will be achieved.’’ 

This provision will be retained as a 

State enforceable only requirement.2

Delaware’s August 19, 2016, letter is 

available in the docket for this 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1