[The Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations]
[Department of Education Regulatory Plan]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]


DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (ED)

Statement of Regulatory Priorities
In response to President Clinton's ``Regulatory Reinvention 
Initiative,'' announced March 4, 1995, the Department of Education is 
engaged in a comprehensive reinvention of its programs, legislation, 
and implementing regulations to enhance partnerships, flexibility, and 
accountability. The Department's Principles for Regulating determine 
when and how it will regulate. Through the application of these 
principles, the Department will eliminate or reinvent 93 percent of its 
regulations, will not issue new regulations unless they are essential 
to improve the quality of educational services and customers' access to 
those services, and will continue to review its existing regulations 
for opportunities to reduce excessive prescription and burden.
Principles for Regulating
The Department will regulate only if regulating improves the quality 
and equality of services to the Department's customers, learners of all 
ages. The Department will regulate only when absolutely necessary, and 
then in the most flexible, most equitable, and least burdensome way 
possible.
Regulate only if:
 Regulating is essential to promote quality and equality of 
            opportunity in education;
 A demonstrated problem cannot be resolved without regulation;
 Regulating is necessary to provide legally binding 
            interpretation to resolve ambiguity.
Do not regulate if:
 Entities or situations to be regulated are so diverse that a 
            uniform approach does more harm than good.
How to regulate:
 Regulate no more than necessary;
 Minimize burden and promote multiple approaches to meeting 
            statutory requirements;
 Encourage federally funded activities to be integrated with 
            State and local reform activities;
 Ensure that benefits justify costs of regulation;
 Establish performance objectives rather than specifying 
            compliance behavior;
 Encourage flexibility so institutional forces and incentives 
            achieve desired results.
Regulatory Priorities, General
Through aggressive application of the Principles for Regulating, a 
dedicated, departmentwide effort, and recognition that students and 
educational partners are best served by comprehensive regulatory 
reinvention, the Department of Education has identified significant 
opportunities to eliminate and reinvent its regulations. As a result of 
the President's regulatory reinvention initiative, the Department has 
already eliminated over 35 percent of its regulations and is committed 
to eliminating or reinventing a total of 93 percent of its regulations.
Not content simply to remove outdated or unnecessary regulations, the 
Department has identified situations in which major new programs could 
be implemented without any regulations at all. The Department 
originally expected to issue regulations to implement the Goals 2000: 
Educate America Act and the School-to-Work Opportunities Act and, in 
fact, included these regulations in its 1994 Regulatory Plan as two of 
the Department's most significant planned regulatory actions. However, 
the Department subsequently decided not to issue regulations to 
implement either of these high-priority statutes. Instead, schools, 
school districts, and States have maximum flexibility to use funds 
within statutory limits. In other words, regulatory burden has been 
avoided altogether.
Woven throughout the Department's reinvention is a commitment to 
provide quality customer service in the spirit of continuous 
improvement to assure that the Department is truly ``putting people 
first.'' The Department places a high priority on listening to its 
customers to identify their needs and incorporate their suggestions 
into program goals and strategies.
Negotiated rulemaking is a formal process for assuring public 
participation. Recently, the Department successfully used this 
technique for regulations implementing the programs under title I of 
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended by the 
Improving America's Schools Act of 1994. Negotiators reached 
substantial consensus on policy options on two key issues in these 
regulations, ``standards, assessment, and accountability'' and 
``schoolwide programs.'' Final title I regulations incorporating the 
results of the negotiations were published July 3, 1995 (60 FR 34800).
During the past 2 years, the Department conducted extensive meetings 
and other exchanges to design new laws and regulations, develop 
research priorities, and plan program implementation and technical 
assistance. These valuable partnerships will continue in fiscal year 
1996. The Department has initiated many focused discussion groups with 
teachers, parents, students, and program administrators to find out 
what they think about its programs and service and to help it to make 
policy decisions.
The Department solicited feedback on its overall performance through 
telephone interviews, conducted in 15 States during February 1995, with 
randomly selected parents and teachers, State education staff, 
principals, school board members, superintendents, and financial aid 
officers.
To provide information and support enhanced exchange, the Department 
instituted 1-800-USA-LEARN to connect customers to a ``one-stop-
shopping'' center for information about Departmental programs and 
initiatives, 1-800-4FED-AID for information on student aid, and an On-
line Library of information on education legislation, research, 
statistics, and promising programs. More than 10,000 people take 
advantage of these resources every week.
The Department has forged effective partnerships with customers and 
partners to develop policies, regulations, guidance, technical 
assistance, and compliance approaches. The Department has an impressive 
record of successful communication and shared policy development with 
affected persons and groups, including representatives of State and 
local governments, institutions of higher education, school 
administrators, teachers, parents, students, special education and 
rehabilitation service providers, professional associations, advocacy 
organizations, business, and labor.
In particular, the Department continues to seek greater and more useful 
customer participation in its rulemaking activities. When rulemaking is 
determined to be absolutely necessary, customer participation is 
essential and sought at all stages--in advance of formal rulemaking, 
during rulemaking, and after rulemaking is completed--in anticipation 
of further improvements through statutory or regulatory changes.
Solicitation of public comment in advance of the publication of notices 
of proposed rulemaking is becoming standard procedure in the 
Department. In 1994, for example, Assistant Secretaries, regulatory 
policy staff, and program administrators of bilingual education 
programs, rehabilitative education, vocational rehabilitation, and 
student aid programs held prepublication meetings in several locations 
around the country to ask the public for suggestions respecting 
regulations.
To facilitate even broader awareness of and participation in its 
rulemaking activity, the Department is expanding these outreach efforts 
through the use of satellite broadcasts, electronic bulletin boards, 
and teleconferencing. For example, since the Department now invites 
comments on all proposed rules through the Internet, the next step 
could be to provide an electronic mechanism that would allow commenters 
to respond to each others' comments, thereby enhancing the information 
available to the Department in developing any necessary regulations.
The Department has also proposed dramatic program improvements, leading 
to major regulatory reforms, through its reauthorization proposals for 
vocational education, adult education, and the education of individuals 
with disabilities.
Under the Department's vocational education proposal, 23 separate set-
asides and categorical authorities would be eliminated and replaced by 
one State-administered program, one broad discretionary grant program 
for national needs, and two small special-purpose authorities. The 
administrative and paperwork requirements under the State-administered 
program would be scaled back significantly in favor of accountability 
for results.
The Department's adult education proposal includes the consolidation of 
12 programs into one, administered by States, and substitutes 
performance measures for burdensome process requirements.
The Department proposes to consolidate 14 discrete categorical programs 
into 5 broad program authorities that will support State and local 
implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and 
improve results for children with disabilities. The Department's 
reauthorization proposal would reduce unnecessary paperwork and burden 
so that resources can be focused on improving teaching and learning.
Regulatory Priorities for the Next Year
The Department of Education will have the following major regulatory 
priorities in 1996:
William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program
As a result of administering the Direct Loan Program for 1 year, the 
Secretary is convinced that services to borrowers can be improved and 
program flexibility increased. A notice of proposed rulemaking has been 
issued proposing programmatic changes that would improve services to 
student and parent borrowers, increase institutional flexibility, and 
enhance the Department's administrative and fiscal oversight 
capabilities.
In addition to these regulations listed in the Department's Regulatory 
Plan, the following regulations would also propose changes affecting 
the Direct Loan Program: RIN 1840-AC19 (amending provisions of the 
income contingent repayment plan to provide benefits to borrowers and 
protect the taxpayers' interests), and RIN 1840-AC17 (defining a 
measure the Secretary may use to determine if a school may continue to 
participate in the Direct Loan Program).
Elimination of Regulations
In response to the President's ``Regulatory Reinvention Initiative,'' 
directing heads of departments and agencies to eliminate outdated 
regulations and modify others to increase flexibility and reduce 
burden, the Department has so far eliminated 96 entire regulations from 
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), totaling over 480 pages (60 FR 
27223, May 23, 1995; 60 FR 34800, July 3, 1995; 60 FR 50774, September 
29, 1995). An additional 58 regulations have been targeted for 
elimination under the Department's plan for regulatory reinvention.
Student Financial Aid Improvements
During October and November 1994, the Assistant Secretary for 
Postsecondary Education and other senior Department officials conducted 
four regional meetings--in Seattle, Washington; Kansas City, Missouri; 
Boston, Massachusetts; and Atlanta, Georgia--to solicit public comment 
on the reform of the Federal student financial assistance programs 
through statutory, regulatory, and procedural improvements. The 
Department was represented at these meetings by the Assistant Secretary 
and other senior officials, including the Chief Financial Officer and 
Deputy General Counsel for Regulations and Legislation Service, 
representing program and other offices.
Disussion at each of the meetings focused on three areas--regulatory 
simplicity, access to postsecondary education, and vocational education 
and training. In conjunction with these meetings, the Department also 
held targeted sessions with students, financial aid administrators, 
college presidents, business officers, and representatives of 
associations, community colleges, proprietary schools, and Historically 
Black Colleges and Universities to focus on the particular concerns of 
these customers. Representatives of the Department visited financial 
aid offices at local institutions of higher education to seek the views 
of those who administer student aid programs. Between 200 and 300 
people attended each of the four public meetings, and an average of 20 
attended each of the smaller meetings. In addition, the Department 
received more than 60 written comments relating to student aid reform.
In regulations governing the oversight of postsecondary institutions, 
the Department has attempted to minimize reporting and recordkeeping 
burden on institutions, within the constraints of the applicable 
statutes. The Secretary is currently involved in comprehensive 
discussions with the higher education community on possible statutory 
and regulatory changes to enhance accountability while further reducing 
this burden.
The Department is proposing a new approach to gatekeeping, oversight, 
and regulatory reform in which (a) substantial regulatory relief will 
be provided to institutions that have demonstrated highly responsible 
management of title IV student financial aid programs, and (b) stronger 
gatekeeping and oversight efforts will be focused on new and risky 
institutions. The Department is already focusing its resources on at-
risk institutions and is developing a system of risk analysis to 
further develop that process.
The Department also plans to conduct regulatory and administrative 
experiments and to provide associated statutory and regulatory waivers 
to explore ways of providing regulatory relief to institutions that 
demonstrate sound management of student aid programs. In an April 25, 
1995, notice in the Federal Register (60 FR 20326), the Secretary 
invited institutions of higher education that administer Federal 
student aid programs to propose ``experimental sites'' projects under 
section 487A(d) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA). 
This statutory authority permits institutions to serve as laboratories 
for regulatory innovation by participating voluntarily as sites for 
experimental management approaches. This authority will be used to 
develop experiments under which the Secretary waives burdensome (but 
generally necessary) requirements for an institution in exchange for 
performance measures suited to the institution and to the regulatory 
objective. An institution approved as an experimental site under this 
student aid reform initiative may be exempted from certain statutory or 
regulatory requirements.
The Secretary established no regulatory requirements for the proposals 
invited by the notice. The Department hopes that this approach will 
encourage institutions to develop truly innovative administrative 
strategies that relieve unnecessary regulatory burden while maintaining 
program accountability. If these experimental strategies prove 
successful, the Department will incorporate them into future 
regulations and, if appropriate, legislative proposals. While it is not 
possible to estimate the number of administrative strategies that might 
relieve unnecessary regulatory burden, the potential for identifying 
greatly improved regulatory approaches is substantial. The Department 
is currently reviewing a large number of proposals from institutions 
and consortia and expects to begin approving the first experimental 
sites soon.
Student Right-to-Know Act
The Student Right-to-Know Act is a consumer-information law that 
requires institutions that participate in any of the student financial 
assistance programs authorized by title IV of the HEA to disseminate to 
students and prospective students information regarding the graduation 
rates of the institution's full-time, undergraduate, degree- or 
certificate-seeking students. It also requires participating 
institutions that award athletically related student aid to disclose to 
potential student-athletes and their parents, coaches, and high school 
counselors information regarding enrollment and the average graduation 
and completion rates (categorized by race and gender) of all students 
and of students who receive athletically related student aid.
Publication of these regulations, previously listed in the Department's 
1994 Regulatory Plan, was deferred so that the Department could develop 
a new notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), substantially simplifying 
the disclosure requirements, in accordance with the Secretary's 
Principles for Regulating. The revised NPRM proposes to ensure utility 
of the data for students while minimizing burden.
Revised Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) 
Selection Criteria
The Department has initiated a review and evaluation of the EDGAR 
selection criteria for discretionary grant programs that do not have 
regulations. (See section 75.210 of 34 CFR Part 75 (Direct Grant 
Programs)). A broad cross-section of Department program, legal, and 
administrative personnel are participating in the review with the 
intention of developing a ``menu'' of selection criteria that will be 
appropriate for many of the Department's discretionary grant programs 
now implemented through individual program regulations.
By using an extensive menu of EDGAR selection criteria appropriate for 
a wide variety of the Department's programs (e.g., research, planning, 
demonstration, training, fellowship, and field-initiated programs), as 
well as for more traditional grant programs, and allowing variable 
weights to be assigned for these criteria, the individual sets of 
regulations needed for these programs could be substantially reduced or 
eliminated. This action would benefit the Department's customers by 
reducing regulatory burden and increasing program flexibility. As many 
as 38 existing regulations could be eliminated as a result.
_______________________________________________________________________
ED--Departmental Management (EDMAN)

                              -----------

                          PROPOSED RULE STAGE

                              -----------

17.  REVISED EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE 
REGULATIONS (EDGAR) SELECTION CRITERIA
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 20 USC 1221e-3; 20 USC 3474


CFR Citation:


 34 CFR 75


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


These regulations would expand the current EDGAR selection criteria in 
34 CFR 75.210. Section 75.210 provides selection criteria for 
discretionary grant programs without implementing regulations. This 
regulatory action would create an extensive menu of criteria that could 
be used for a variety of the Department's programs, including research, 
planning, demonstration, training, fellowship, and field-initiated 
programs.


Statement of Need:


These regulations would reduce the need for separate sets of 
regulations to govern individual discretionary grant programs.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


Use of the EDGAR selection criteria would be determined on a program-
by-program basis, subject to the applicable statutory program authority 
and program needs for effective and efficient operation.


Alternatives:


The EDGAR selection criteria would be developed as an alternative to 
issuing regulations for each of the individual programs that are able 
to use them.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


Regulations for programs for which the EDGAR selection criteria are 
appropriate could be reduced or eliminated. Providing a menu of 
criteria for which variable weights could be assigned, would increase 
program flexibility.


Risks:


These proposed regulations would not address a risk to public health, 
safety, or the environment.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM                                                           11/00/95
Final Action                                                   00/00/00
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


None


Agency Contact:
Margo Anderson
Department of Education
555 New Jersey Avenue NW.
Room 602L, Capitol Place
Washington, DC 20208-5530
Phone: 202 219-2000
RIN: 1880-AA74
_______________________________________________________________________
ED--Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE)

                              -----------

                          PROPOSED RULE STAGE

                              -----------

18.  STUDENT FINANCIAL AID IMPROVEMENTS (STUDENT ASSISTANCE 
GENERAL PROVISIONS, FEDERAL FAMILY EDUCATION LOANS, PELL GRANT, PERKINS 
LOAN, WORK STUDY, & SUPPLEMENTAL EDUC. OPPORTUNITY GRANT PROGS)
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 20 USC 1070 et seq


CFR Citation:


 34 CFR 668; 34 CFR 674; 34 CFR 675; 34 CFR 676; 34 CFR 682; 34 CFR 
685; 34 CFR 690


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


These regulations would amend certain provisions of the student 
financial assistance regulations to relieve unnecessary compliance 
burdens and remove obsolete requirements. Many changes have already 
been made, and further reforms will be implemented as soon as possible. 
Separate regulations involving these or additional parts of the Code of 
Federal Regulations may be scheduled in the future as part of the 
improvement effort.


Statement of Need:


Meetings and discussions involving Department officials, members of the 
higher education community, and others interested in the Department's 
student financial assistance programs have indicated areas where 
improvements in the Department's regulations are warranted. These 
changes are part of a comprehensive effort to improve the 
administration of the student financial assistance programs.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended.


Alternatives:


The Department will consider alternatives to the existing regulations, 
including the elimination of regulations, in circumstances that would 
continue to safeguard and ensure the appropriate expenditure of Federal 
funds.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The Department has already made a number of changes to the Federal 
student aid regulations to eliminate paperwork burden regarding 
recordkeeping, exchange of paper documents, hard copy storage, multiple 
forms of signatures, and complex calculations. Examples of these 
changes include the following:
1. Eliminating most of the contents of paper Student Aid Reports and 
planning for the complete elimination of paper forms in favor of 
electronically transmitted data. This change alone means that each year 
four million forms will not have to be processed and stored by 
participating schools. If laid end to end, these forms would stretch 
nearly 700 miles.
2. Simplifying the process by which hundreds of thousands of student 
aid applicants verify to their schools the information provided on 
original financial aid application.
3. Permitting one parent to sign financial aid application and 
verification forms rather than requiring two.
4. Saving time for student aid staff by simplifying the description of 
the refund process and the resulting calculation process.
5. Giving schools flexibility to decide how best to inform new students 
of their student loan obligations under direct lending.
6. Allowing Federal Perkins Loan borrowers to repay their loans by 
electronic funds transfer and allowing institutions to provide a 
statement of account only once each year.
7. Allowing students and schools flexibility to manage student accounts 
to help budget funds and to enhance opportunities to use new 
technologies, such as Smart Cards and Electronic Funds Transfer.
8. Reducing burden on schools by expanding the types of media that 
schools may use to store Federal financial aid information.
9. Requiring submission of compliance audits 6, rather than 4, months 
after the end of the school's fiscal year to improve coordination with 
most schools' regular auditing process.
Similar benefits are expected to result from continuing the 
Department's efforts to improve the administration of the student 
financial assistance programs.


Risks:


These proposed regulations would not address a risk to public health, 
safety, or the environment.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM            60 FR 49114                                    09/21/95
NPRM Comment Period End                                        10/27/95
Final Action                                                   12/00/95
Small Entities Affected:


Undetermined


Government Levels Affected:


Undetermined


Agency Contact:
Harold McCullough
Department of Education
Office of Postsecondary Education
600 Independence Avenue SW.
Room 3045, ROB-3
Washington, DC 20202
Phone: 202 708-4690
RIN: 1840-AC20
_______________________________________________________________________
ED--OPE
19.  WILLIAM D. FORD FEDERAL DIRECT LOAN PROGRAM
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 20 USC 1087a et seq


CFR Citation:


 34 CFR 685


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


These proposed regulations would provide schools with more flexibility 
in providing loan origination functions, clarify the date of loan 
origination, and set timelines for the submission of promissory notes, 
disbursement records, and origination records. The proposed regulations 
would also establish the repayment plans available for the 
consolidation of a single Federal Family Education Loan Program loan 
into the Direct Loan Program.
Related proposed regulations would define a measure (called the Direct 
Loan cohort default rate and a weighted average cohort default rate) 
the Secretary may use to determine if a school may continue to 
participate in the Direct Loan Program (see RIN 1840-AC17, Student 
Assistance General Provisions (Default Rate Definition)) and improve 
the existing income contingent repayment plan (see RIN 1840-AC19, 
William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program (Income Contingent 
Repayment)).


Statement of Need:


The Secretary has proposed these regulations to improve the Direct Loan 
Program based on experience gained during the first year of operation.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended.


Alternatives:


Regulations are necessary to implement this student financial 
assistance program. As a result of administering the program for 1 
year, the Secretary is convinced that services to borrowers can be 
substantially improved and schools given more flexibility by revising 
the existing regulations. The Secretary also will consider any 
alternatives recommended in the public comments received on the 
proposed regulations.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The proposed changes would improve services to student and parent 
borrowers, increase institutional flexibility, and enhance the 
Department's administrative and fiscal oversight capabilities. The 
potential costs associated with the regulations are those resulting 
from statutory requirements and those necessary for administering the 
program effectively and efficiently.


Risks:


These regulations do not address a risk to public health, safety, or 
the environment.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM            60 FR 48858                                    09/20/95
NPRM Comment Period End                                        10/31/95
Final Action                                                   12/00/95
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


None


Agency Contact:
Katrina Ingalls
Department of Education
Office of Postsecondary Education
P.O. Box 23272
Washington, DC 20026-3272
Phone: 202 708-9406
RIN: 1840-AC22
_______________________________________________________________________
ED--OPE

                              -----------

                            FINAL RULE STAGE

                              -----------

20. STUDENT RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 20 USC 1092


CFR Citation:


 34 CFR 668


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


These regulations would amend subpart D of 34 CFR Part 668 to require, 
in accordance with the statute, institutions that participate in any of 
the student financial assistance programs authorized by title IV of the 
HEA to disseminate to students and prospective students information 
regarding the graduation rates of the institutions' full-time, 
undergraduate, degree- or certificate-seeking students. In accordance 
with the statute, the amended regulations would also require those 
participating institutions that award athletically related student aid 
to disclose to potential student-athletes and their parents, coaches, 
and high school counselors, information regarding enrollment and the 
average graduation and completion rates (categorized by race and 
gender) of all students and of students who receive athletically 
related student aid.


Statement of Need:


By expanding the types of consumer information that certain 
institutions of higher education must disclose, these regulations would 
help students, student-athletes, and their families make better, more 
informed decisions when they choose a postsecondary institution.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The regulations are necessary to implement provisions of the Student 
Right-to-Know and Campus Security Act, Pub. L. 101-542, as amended by 
the Higher Education Technical Amendments of 1991, Pub. L. 102-26; the 
Higher Education Amendments of 1992, Pub. L. 102-325; and the Higher 
Education Technical Amendments of 1993, Pub. L. 103-208.


Alternatives:


Regulations are necessary to implement the statutory requirements. The 
Secretary has some flexibility with regard to the scope of the 
information required under the disclosure requirement. On July 10, 
1992, the Secretary published proposed regulations and received 
numerous comments from the academic community. These comments, the 
Secretary's Principles for Regulating, and the values reflected in 
Executive Order 12866 and the President's regulatory reinvention 
initiative were considered in developing a revised notice of proposed 
rulemaking that would simplify the regulations and minimize burden on 
the institutions affected.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The costs associated with these regulations will be those for 
recordkeeping and disclosure of the information on graduation rates. In 
implementing the statutory requirements and providing information to 
consumers, the Secretary will work with the postsecondary education 
community to minimize costs for institutions to the extent possible.


Risks:


These regulations do not address a risk to public health, safety, or 
the environment.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM            57 FR 30826                                    07/10/92
NPRM            60 FR 49156                                    09/21/95
Final Action                                                   12/00/95
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


None


Agency Contact:
Paula Husselmann
Department of Education
Office of Postsecondary Education
600 Independence Avenue SW.
Room 3045, ROB-3
Washington, DC 20202
Phone: 202 708-7888
RIN: 1840-AB44
_______________________________________________________________________
ED--Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS)

                              -----------

                            FINAL RULE STAGE

                              -----------

21.  ELIMINATION OF REGULATIONS
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 20 USC 1221e-3


CFR Citation:


 34 CFR 302 et al


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


Elimination of these regulations reduces regulatory burden and 
increases flexibility.


Statement of Need:


As a result of new legislation, absence of funding, and regulatory 
reinvention review, the Secretary has determined that these regulations 
are no longer needed.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The Secretary's general authority to rescind regulations is granted in 
section 410 of the General Education Provisions Act, as amended.


Alternatives:


Not applicable


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


Elimination of these regulations reduces regulatory burden and 
increases flexibility.


Risks:


These regulations would not address a risk to public health, safety, or 
the environment.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
Final Rule      60 FR 27223                                    05/23/95
Final Rule Effective                                           06/22/95
Final Action                                                   12/00/95
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


None


Agency Contact:
Kenneth C. Depew
General Attorney
Office of the General Counsel
Department of Education
Office of the General Counsel
600 Independence Avenue SW.
Room 5112, FB-10
Washington, DC 20202-2241
Phone: 202 401-8300
RIN: 1820-AB34
BILLING CODE 4000-01-F