83 FR 8396 - Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities; Preschool Grants for Children With Disabilities
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 39 (February 27, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 39 (February 27, 2018)
| Page Range | 8396-8399 | |
| FR Document | 2018-04102 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 27, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 8396-8399] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-04102] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 34 CFR Part 300 RIN 1820-AB77 [Docket ID ED-2017-OSERS-0128] Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities; Preschool Grants for Children With Disabilities AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), Department of Education. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: In order to ensure the Department's ``Equity in IDEA'' or ``significant disproportionality'' regulations effectively address significant disproportionality, the Department proposes to postpone the compliance date by two years, from July 1, 2018, to July 1, 2020. The Department also proposes to postpone the date for including children ages three through five in the analysis of significant disproportionality with respect to the identification of children as children with disabilities and as children with a particular impairment from July 1, 2020, to July 1, 2022. DATES: We must receive your comments on or before May 14, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not accept comments by fax or email. To ensure that 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 the ``Help'' tab. Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: The Department strongly encourages commenters to submit their comments electronically. However, if you mail or deliver your comments in response to this request, address them to Johnny W. Collett, Assistant Secretary, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5107, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-2500. 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: Kate Friday, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5104, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-2500. Telephone: (202) 245-7605, or by email at: [email protected]. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service, toll free, at 1-800- 877-8339. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding this notice of proposed rulemaking. We will consider comments on proposed delayed compliance dates only and will not consider comments on the text or substance of the final regulations. See ADDRESSES for instructions on how to submit comments. During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public comments about this notice of proposed rulemaking by accessing Regulations.gov. You may also inspect the comments in person in Room 5104, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Washington, DC time, Monday through Friday of each week, except Federal holidays. If you want to schedule time to inspect comments, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the Rulemaking Record: On request, we will provide an appropriate accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the public rulemaking record for this notice of proposed rulemaking. 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. On February 24, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13777, ``Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,'' which established a policy ``to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens'' on the American people. Section 3(a) of the Executive Order directed each Federal agency to establish a regulatory reform task force, the duty of which is to evaluate existing regulations and ``make recommendations to the agency head regarding their repeal, replacement, or modification.'' On June 22, 2017, therefore, the Department published a notice in the Federal Register (82 FR 28431) seeking input on regulations that may be appropriate for repeal, replacement, or modification. As part of that regulatory review exercise, OSERS is reviewing the Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities; Preschool Grants for Children With Disabilities regulations (the ``Equity in IDEA'' or ``significant disproportionality'' regulations), published in the Federal Register on December 19, 2016 (81 FR 92376). We are, therefore, proposing to postpone the compliance by two years in order that the Department may review the regulation to ensure it effectively addresses significant disproportionality. Statute: Section 618(d)(1) of IDEA (20 U.S.C. 1418(d)(1)) requires every State that receives IDEA Part B funds to [[Page 8397]] collect and examine data to determine if significant disproportionality based on race or ethnicity exists in the State or the LEAs of the State with respect to (a) the identification of children as children with disabilities; (b) the placement in particular educational settings of such children; and (c) the incident, duration, and type of disciplinary actions, including suspensions and expulsions. IDEA does not define ``significant disproportionality'' or instruct how data must be collected and examined. Current Regulations: The current Equity in IDEA regulations effectively define ``significant disproportionality.'' Sections 300.646(b) and 300.647 establish a standard methodology States must use to determine whether significant disproportionality based on race and ethnicity is occurring in the State and in its local educational agencies (LEAs) with respect to the identification, placement, and discipline of children with disabilities. In addition, if a State determines that there is significant disproportionality occurring in an LEA, section 618(d)(2)(B) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Sec. 300.646(d) require the LEA to reserve 15 percent of its Part B funds to be used for comprehensive coordinated early intervening services (comprehensive CEIS). Section 300.646(d)(1)(ii) requires the LEA to identify and address the factors contributing to significant disproportionality as part of implementing comprehensive CEIS. Section 300.646(d)(2) expands the populations of children eligible for these services to include children, with and without disabilities, from age 3 through grade 12. The significant disproportionality regulations became effective January 18, 2017, but the Department delayed the date for compliance. States are not required to begin complying until July 1, 2018, and are not required to include children ages three through five in their analyses of significant disproportionality with respect to the identification of children as children with disabilities and as children with a particular impairment until July 1, 2020. Proposed Regulations: The Department proposes to postpone the compliance date for implementing the regulations to July 1, 2020 from July 1, 2018. The Department also proposes to postpone the compliance date for including children ages three through five in the significant disproportionality analysis to July 1, 2022, from July 1, 2020. Reasons: As the Department noted in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing the significant disproportionality regulations and again in the final rule adopting them, the status quo for school districts across the country properly identifying children with disabilities is troubling. In 2012, American Indian and Alaska Native students were 60 percent more likely to be identified for an intellectual disability than children in other racial or ethnic groups, while black children were more than twice as likely as other groups to be so identified. Similarly, American Indian or Alaska Native students were 90 percent more likely, black students were 50 percent more likely, and Hispanic students were 40 percent more likely to be identified as having a learning disability. In addition, black children were more than twice as likely to be identified with an emotional disturbance. And yet, in SY 2012-13, only 28 States and the District of Columbia identified any LEAs with significant disproportionality, and of the 491 LEAs identified, 75 percent were located in only seven States. Of the States that identified LEAs with significant disproportionality, only the District of Columbia and four States identified significant disproportionality in all three categories of analysis--identification, placement, and in discipline. 81 FR 92380. The Department is concerned, however, given the public comments it has received in response to its general solicitation in 2017 on regulatory reform, that the Equity in IDEA regulations may not appropriately address the problem of significant disproportionality. We therefore propose to postpone by two years the compliance dates for the regulations so that we may review all of the issues raised and determine how to better serve children with disabilities. A number of commenters suggested, for example, that the Department lacks the statutory authority under IDEA to require States to use a standard methodology, pointing out as well that the Department's previous position, adopted in the 2006 regulations implementing the 2004 amendments to IDEA, was that States are in the best position to evaluate factors affecting determinations of significant disproportionality. Similarly, one detailed comment expressed concern that the standard methodology improperly looks at group outcomes through statistical measures rather than focusing on what is at the foundation of IDEA, namely the needs of each individual child and on the appropriateness of individual identifications, placements, or discipline. Further, a number of commenters suggested that the standard methodology would provide incentives to LEAs to establish numerical quotas on the number of children who can be identified as children with disabilities, assigned to certain classroom placements, or disciplined in certain ways. Finally, still other commenters suggested that the Department could not accurately assess the impact of the regulations given that it did not provide any standards by which it would assess the required ``reasonableness'' of State risk ratio thresholds and that calculations of significant disproportionality should be better aligned with State Performance Plan indicators, including the percent of districts that have a significant discrepancy, by race or ethnicity, in the rate of suspensions and expulsion for children with disabilities (Indicator 4B), and the percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services (Indicator 9) and in specific disability categories (Indicator 10) that is the result of inappropriate identification. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely to result in a rule that may-- (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to as an ``economically significant'' rule); (2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the Executive order. This proposed regulatory action is a significant regulatory action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. We have also reviewed these regulations under Executive Order [[Page 8398]] 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency-- (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify); (2) Tailor their 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 specifying the behavior or manner of compliance that regulated entities must adopt; and (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct regulation, including providing 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 this proposed regulatory action only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits justify its costs. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes that these regulations are consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563. We also have determined that this regulatory action would not unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the exercise of their governmental functions. In this regulatory impact analysis we discuss the need for regulatory action, alternatives considered, the potential costs and benefits, net budget impacts, assumptions, limitations, and data sources. Need for These Regulations As explained in the previous section, we are proposing this regulatory action in order to delay implementation of a regulation that we are concerned may not meet its fundamental purpose, namely to properly identify and address significant disproportionality among children with disabilities. We propose the delay as well to give the Department, the States, and the public additional time to study the questions involved and determine how to better serve children with disabilities. Alternatives Considered The Department considered proposing a delay of the compliance dates for different lengths of time and decided upon two years as an appropriate length, given a realistic measure of how long it takes the agency to develop, propose, and promulgate complex regulations. In the Department's experience, one year is too little time as a general matter and, for these regulations in particular, given the amount of work on this issue the Department has already done, three years is too long. Analysis of Costs and Benefits The Department has analyzed the costs of complying with the proposed regulatory action. While postponing the obligation to comply with the regulations would not place any new requirements on States, the delay in the compliance date would reduce costs over the 10 years relative to the baseline set out in the December 2016 final rule. The Department estimates that this regulatory action would generate cost savings between $10.9 and $11.5 million, with a reduction in transfers of between $59.6 and $63.0 million. These savings are driven by two separate, but related factors: Fewer States implementing the regulations during the 2018-19 and 2019-20 school years and, as a result, the lower number of LEAs identified as having significant disproportionality in each of those years under the standard methodology. In developing our estimates, the Department assumed that a small number of States, who may already be prepared, or nearly prepared, to implement the regulations on July 1, 2018 will continue to do so, regardless of any delay in the compliance date. We also assume that a subset of States will implement the regulations in the following school year (2019-20), with the remainder of States waiting until the 2020 compliance date to implement the regulations. We assume that 10 States would implement the revised regulations on July 1, 2018, five States would implement them as of July 1, 2019, and the remaining 40 would wait until July 1, 2020. Further, the Department estimates that the number of LEAs identified with significant disproportionality in each year as a result of the revised regulations would be reduced due to the delay in implementation. Previously, the Department estimated that 400 new LEAs would be identified each year. We estimate that the delay in compliance date would result in only 80 additional LEAs being identified in the 2018-2019 school year (a reduction of 320) and only 100 additional LEAs identified in the 2019-20 school year (a reduction of 300). These estimates assume that the number of additional LEAs identified each year is roughly proportional to the number of States that implement the revised regulations.\1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ This calculation of savings includes a change to the baseline in the December 2016 final rule due to an incorrect calculation in the 3 percent discount rate, shown in detail in the cost analysis spreadsheet posted in the docket with this document. This calculation of cost savings does not change any of the assumptions regarding wage rates, hours of burden, or number of personnel that were discussed in the final rule. The assumptions upon which the cost-benefit calculations in the final rule are based are being evaluated by the Department as part of the review of the final rule itself. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Executive Order 13771 Consistent with Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017), we have estimated that this proposed regulatory action will not impose any additional costs. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification The Secretary certifies that these proposed regulations would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) Size Standards define ``small entities'' as for-profit or nonprofit institutions with total annual revenue below $7,000,000 or, if they are institutions controlled by small governmental jurisdictions (that are comprised of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts), with a population of less than 50,000. These proposed regulations would affect all LEAs, including the estimated 17,371 LEAs that meet the definition of small entities. However, we have determined that the proposed regulations would not have a significant economic impact on these small entities. As stated earlier, this proposed regulatory action imposes no new costs. [[Page 8399]] Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This regulatory action does not contain any information collection requirements. 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 the Department's specific plans and actions for this program. Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. 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 in 34 CFR Part 300 Administrative practice and procedure, Education of individuals with disabilities, Elementary and secondary education, Equal educational opportunity, Grant programs--education, Privacy, Private schools, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: February 23, 2018. Johnny W. Collett, Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. [FR Doc. 2018-04102 Filed 2-23-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
![8396 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 39 / Tuesday, February 27, 2018 / Proposed Rules
actions, including further investigations that also proposes to postpone the date for substance of the final regulations. See
should be taken to ensure that the matter is including children ages three through ADDRESSES for instructions on how to
fully and fairly addressed. When responding five in the analysis of significant submit comments.
to the complainant, DCCA will also provide disproportionality with respect to the During and after the comment period,
a final copy of the response letter to the you may inspect all public comments
Ombudsman.
identification of children as children
If the Ombudsman receives a complaint with disabilities and as children with a about this notice of proposed
regarding DCCA’s review of an appeal, the particular impairment from July 1, 2020, rulemaking by accessing
Ombudsman will collect and review the to July 1, 2022. Regulations.gov. You may also inspect
complaint documents and seek any other DATES: We must receive your comments the comments in person in Room 5104,
relevant information. The Ombudsman may on or before May 14, 2018. 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Potomac
also consult Board and Reserve Bank staff to
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
Center Plaza, Washington, DC, between
discuss the details of the previous complaint 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Washington, DC
investigations. The Ombudsman is through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, time, Monday through Friday of each
responsible for responding to the week, except Federal holidays. If you
complainant with its determination. As or hand delivery. We will not accept
want to schedule time to inspect
appropriate, the Ombudsman will contact the comments by fax or email. To ensure
comments, please contact the person
appropriate Board division director and that we do not receive duplicate copies,
Reserve Bank staff with feedback or concerns. listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
please submit your comments only
Safeguards. These policies, processes, and CONTACT.
once. In addition, please include the Assistance to Individuals with
practices are intended as safeguards to Docket ID at the top of your comments.
encourage complainants to come forward Disabilities in Reviewing the
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
with issues or complaints related to the Rulemaking Record: On request, we will
www.regulations.gov to submit your
Federal Reserve System’s regulatory provide an appropriate accommodation
activities. comments electronically. Information
or auxiliary aid to an individual with a
To the extent possible, the Ombudsman on using Regulations.gov, including disability who needs assistance to
will honor requests to keep confidential the instructions for accessing agency review the comments or other
identity of a complaining party. It must be documents, submitting comments, and documents in the public rulemaking
recognized, however, that it may not be viewing the docket is available on the
possible for the Ombudsman to resolve
record for this notice of proposed
site under the ‘‘Help’’ tab. rulemaking. If you want to schedule an
certain complaints, including complaints of • Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery,
retaliation, if the Ombudsman cannot appointment for this type of
or Hand Delivery: The Department
disclose the identity of the complaining party accommodation or auxiliary aid, please
strongly encourages commenters to contact the person listed under FOR
to other members of Federal Reserve staff.
Procedures. A party may contact the submit their comments electronically. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Ombudsman at any time regarding concerns However, if you mail or deliver your On February 24, 2017, President
or issues resulting from the regulatory comments in response to this request, Trump signed Executive Order 13777,
activities of the Board or the Reserve Banks address them to Johnny W. Collett, ‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory Reform
by calling 1-800–337–0429, by sending a fax Assistant Secretary, Office of Special Agenda,’’ which established a policy ‘‘to
to 202–530–6208, by writing to the Office of Education and Rehabilitation Services, alleviate unnecessary regulatory
the Ombudsman, Board of Governors of the U.S. Department of Education, 400
Federal Reserve System, Washington, D.C. burdens’’ on the American people.
Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5107, Section 3(a) of the Executive Order
20551, or by sending an email to
Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC directed each Federal agency to
Ombudsman@frb.gov.
20202–2500. establish a regulatory reform task force,
[FR Doc. 2018–03907 Filed 2–26–18; 8:45 am] Privacy Note: The Department’s the duty of which is to evaluate existing
BILLING CODE 6210–01–P policy is to make all comments received regulations and ‘‘make
from members of the public available for recommendations to the agency head
public viewing in their entirety on the regarding their repeal, replacement, or
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Federal eRulemaking Portal at modification.’’ On June 22, 2017,
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, therefore, the Department published a
34 CFR Part 300 commenters should be careful to notice in the Federal Register (82 FR
RIN 1820–AB77 include in their comments only 28431) seeking input on regulations that
information that they wish to make may be appropriate for repeal,
[Docket ID ED–2017–OSERS–0128] publicly available. replacement, or modification.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate As part of that regulatory review
Assistance to States for the Education
Friday, U.S. Department of Education, exercise, OSERS is reviewing the
of Children With Disabilities;
400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5104, Assistance to States for the Education of
Preschool Grants for Children With
Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC Children With Disabilities; Preschool
Disabilities
20202–2500. Telephone: (202) 245– Grants for Children With Disabilities
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 7605, or by email at: Kate.Friday@ regulations (the ‘‘Equity in IDEA’’ or
Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), ed.gov. ‘‘significant disproportionality’’
Department of Education. If you use a telecommunications regulations), published in the Federal
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. device for the deaf (TDD) or a text Register on December 19, 2016 (81 FR
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay 92376). We are, therefore, proposing to
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY: In order to ensure the Service, toll free, at 1–800–877–8339. postpone the compliance by two years
Department’s ‘‘Equity in IDEA’’ or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: in order that the Department may
‘‘significant disproportionality’’ Invitation to Comment: We invite you review the regulation to ensure it
regulations effectively address to submit comments regarding this effectively addresses significant
significant disproportionality, the notice of proposed rulemaking. We will disproportionality.
Department proposes to postpone the consider comments on proposed Statute: Section 618(d)(1) of IDEA (20
compliance date by two years, from July delayed compliance dates only and will U.S.C. 1418(d)(1)) requires every State
1, 2018, to July 1, 2020. The Department not consider comments on the text or that receives IDEA Part B funds to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:03 Feb 26, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM 27FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_8435/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 39 / Tuesday, February 27, 2018 / Proposed Rules 8399
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 POSTAL SERVICE Background
This regulatory action does not On December 18, 2013, in a notice of
39 CFR Part 111 final rulemaking (78 FR 76548–76560),
contain any information collection
requirements. Proposed Changes to Validations for the Postal Service announced that
Intelligent Mail Package Barcode mailers who enter commercial parcels
Intergovernmental Review must adhere to the following: IMpb
AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. must be used on all commercial parcels;
This program is subject to Executive piece-level information must be
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 ACTION: Proposed rule. submitted to the Postal Service via an
CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the approved electronic file format (except
Executive order is to foster an SUMMARY: The Postal Service is for mailers generating barcodes for use
intergovernmental partnership and a proposing to revise the Mailing on return services products, such as
strengthened federalism. The Executive Standards of the United States Postal MRS); and electronic files must include
order relies on processes developed by Service, Domestic Mail Manual the complete destination delivery
State and local governments for (DMM®), to add new Intelligent Mail® address and/or an 11-digit Delivery
coordination and review of proposed package barcode (IMpb) validations for Point Validation (DPV®) ZIP Code® for
Federal financial assistance. evaluating compliance with IMpb all records, except for Parcel Return
This document provides early requirements for all mailers who enter Service, a ZIP+4® Code is required to be
notification of the Department’s specific commercial parcels. encoded into the barcode for all returns
plans and actions for this program. DATES:Submit comments on or before products.
Accessible Format: Individuals with March 29, 2018. Since IMpb requirements were
disabilities can obtain this document in implemented, the Postal Service has
ADDRESSES: Mail or deliver written made significant advances with its
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large comments to the manager, Product
print, audiotape, or compact disc) on package strategy. Use of IMpbs
Classification, U.S. Postal Service, 475 continues to be the critical bridge
request to the contact person listed L’Enfant Plaza SW, Room 4446,
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION between physical packages and the
Washington, DC 20260–5015. If sending digital information required to enable
CONTACT.
comments by email, include the name world class service, tracking, visibility,
Electronic Access to This Document: and address of the commenter and send and positive customer experiences.
The official version of this document is to ProductClassification@usps.gov, with Barcode intelligence along with the
the document published in the Federal a subject line of ‘‘Intelligent Mail corresponding digital data captured
Register. Free internet access to the Package Barcode Validations.’’ Faxed through in-transit processing and
official edition of the Federal Register comments are not accepted. You may delivery scans are fundamental
and the Code of Federal Regulations is inspect and photocopy all written requirements in the shipping market.
available via the Federal Digital System comments, by appointment only, at The data have enabled the Postal
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you USPS® Headquarters Library, 475 Service and its customers to enhance
can view this document, as well as all L’Enfant Plaza SW, 11th Floor North, products, improve customer
other documents of this Department Washington, DC 20260. These records satisfaction, increase efficiencies,
published in the Federal Register, in are available for review on Monday provide greater visibility, integrate with
text or Portable Document Format through Friday, 9 a.m.–4 p.m., by eCommerce and supply chain systems,
(PDF). To use PDF you must have calling 202–268–2906. enhance performance and analytics
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is tools, and generate actionable business
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
available free at the site. insights for better decisions.
Direct questions or comments to
You may also access documents of the Juliaann Hess at jsanders.hess@usps.gov In January 2015, the Postal Service
Department published in the Federal or (202) 268–7663. required that all parcels with an IMpb
Register by using the article search be accompanied by the complete
feature at: www.federalregister.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Postal destination delivery address or an 11-
Specifically, through the advanced Service is proposing to update IMpb digit ZIP Code (validated by the DPV
search feature at this site, you can limit requirements relative to Compliance System, or an approved equivalent) in
your search to documents published by Quality Validations for Thresholds, the Shipping Services File or other
the Department. Address Quality, Shipping Services File approved electronic documentation.
Manifest Quality, and Barcode Quality. This information is critical to the Postal
List of Subjects in 34 CFR Part 300 These proposed validations would Service package strategy, the dynamic
allow the Postal Service to further routing process that enable package
Administrative practice and improve service, tracking, visibility, and
procedure, Education of individuals distribution without scheme-trained
positive customer experiences along employees, improving the customer’s
with disabilities, Elementary and with better identifying noncompliant
secondary education, Equal educational experience, and enhancing business
mailpieces. insights and analytics.
opportunity, Grant programs—
education, Privacy, Private schools, Technical and in-depth IMpb In January 2016, the Postal Service
Reporting and recordkeeping guidance is available in Publication 199, began measuring the quality of mailer
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
requirements. Intelligent Mail Package Barcode compliance for the newly introduced
Implementation Guide for: Confirmation IMpb Compliance Quality Category with
Dated: February 23, 2018. Services and Electronic Verification data validations to determine the IMpb
Johnny W. Collett, System Mailers, which is conveniently Compliance Assessment criteria as
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and located on the PostalPro website at follows: Address Quality, Manifest
Rehabilitative Services. https://postalpro.usps.com. This Quality, and Barcode Quality. Then, in
[FR Doc. 2018–04102 Filed 2–23–18; 4:15 pm] publication would be updated to reflect July 2017, the Postal Service began
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P all adopted changes. assessing mailers with a $0.20 IMpb
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:03 Feb 26, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM 27FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_8435/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-27 01:14:52
Document Modified: 2018-02-27 01:14:52
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Notice of proposed rulemaking. | |
| Dates | We must receive your comments on or before May 14, 2018. | |
| Contact | Kate Friday, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5104, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-2500. Telephone: (202) 245-7605, or by email at: [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 8396 | |
| RIN Number | 1820-AB77 | |
| CFR Associated | Administrative Practice and Procedure; Education of Individuals with Disabilities; Elementary and Secondary Education; Equal Educational Opportunity; Grant Programs-Education; Privacy; Private Schools and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR