Home Encyclopedia Standards of Excellence College Goal Sunday LearnStudentAid.org Parents & Students
 
NASFAA
1101 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20036-4303

Phone: 202-785-0453
Fax: 202-785-1487
Web@NASFAA.org

Federal Register: March 21, 2008

Volume 73, Number 56

[Notices]

[Page 15335-15374]

[This PDF version of document with internal links that allow you to move from the beginning of the document to the table of contents of the TEACH proposed rule language. There is also a bookmark added to take you to the table of contents, which you can use no matter where you are in the document by opening bookmarks on the left tab. The table of contents is also linked to respective sections of the rules, and links have been added to take you back and forth between the discussion of sections in the preamble and the corresponding proposed rule language. The links going from the preamble to the rule are highlighted in yellow; the links from the rule to the preamble are boxed.]



Part III Department of Education

34 CFR Parts 668, 673, 674, et al. The Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program and Other Federal Student Aid Programs; Proposed Rule [[Page 15336]]

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 34 CFR Parts 668, 673, 674, 675, 676, 682, 685, 686, and 690 RIN 1840-AC93 [Docket ID ED-2008-OPE-0001] The Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program and Other Federal Student Aid Programs AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Secretary proposes to amend title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations to establish regulations for the Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program. The TEACH Grant program is a non-need-based grant program that provides up to $4,000 per year to students who are enrolled in an eligible program and who agree to teach in a high-need field, at a low-income elementary or secondary school for at least four years within eight years of completing the program for which the TEACH Grant was awarded. If the grant recipient fails to complete the required teaching service, the TEACH grant is treated as a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Stafford Loan (Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan). The Secretary also proposes to amend the regulations related to the Student Assistance General Provisions; the General Provisions for the Federal Perkins Loan Program, the Federal Work-Study Program, the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant Program; the Federal Perkins Loan Program; the Federal Work-Study Programs; the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant Program; the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) Program; the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program; and the Federal Pell Grant Program to implement the TEACH Grant Program. These proposed regulations are needed to implement provisions of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA), as amended by the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 (CCRAA). DATES: We must receive your comments on or before April 21, 2008. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not accept comments by fax or by e-mail. Please submit your comments only one time, in order to ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies. In addition, please include the Docket ID at the top of your comments. Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov to submit your comments electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site under "How To Use This Site." Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery. If you mail or deliver your comments about these proposed regulations, address them to Michelle Belton, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street, NW., room 8031, Washington, DC 20006-8502. Privacy Note: The Department's policy for comments received from members of the public (including those comments submitted by mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery) is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. All submissions will be posted to the Federal eRulemaking Portal without change, including personal identifiers and contact information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Belton, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street, NW., room 8031, Washington, DC 20006-8502. Telephone: (202) 502-7821 or via the Internet at: Michelle.Belton@ed.gov. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf, call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339. Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Invitation To Comment As outlined in the section of this notice entitled "Negotiated Rulemaking," significant public participation, through three public hearings and three negotiated rulemaking sessions, has occurred in developing this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). Therefore, in accordance with the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, the Department invites you to submit comments regarding these proposed regulations on or before April 21, 2008. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in developing the final regulations, we urge you to identify clearly the specific section or sections of the proposed regulations that each of your comments addresses and to arrange your comments in the same order as the proposed regulations. We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific requirements of Executive Order 12866, including its overall requirements to assess both the costs and the benefits of the intended regulation and feasible alternatives, and to make a reasoned determination that the benefits of this intended regulation justify its costs. Please let us know of any further opportunities we should take to reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving the effective and efficient administration of the programs. During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public comments about these proposed regulations by accessing Regulations.gov. You may also inspect the comments, in person, in room 8031, 1990 K Street, NW., Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal holidays. Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the Rulemaking Record On request, we will supply an appropriate aid, such as a reader or print magnifier, to an individual with a disability who needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the public rulemaking record for these proposed regulations. If you want to schedule an appointment for this type of aid, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Negotiated Rulemaking Section 492 of the HEA requires the Secretary, before publishing any proposed regulations for programs authorized by Title IV of the HEA, to obtain public involvement in the development of the proposed regulations. After obtaining advice and recommendations from the public, including individuals and representatives of groups involved in the Federal student financial assistance programs, the Secretary must subject the proposed regulations to a negotiated rulemaking process. All proposed regulations that the Department publishes on which the negotiators reached consensus must conform to final agreements resulting from that process unless the Secretary reopens the process or provides a written explanation to the participants stating why the Secretary has decided to depart from the agreements. Further information on the negotiated rulemaking process can be found at: [[Page 15337]] http://www.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2008/index2008.html. On October 22, 2007, the Department published a notice in the Federal Register (72 FR 59494) announcing our intent to establish up to two negotiated rulemaking committees to prepare proposed regulations. One committee would focus on issues related to the new TEACH Grant program (TEACH Grant Committee). A second committee would address Federal student loans. The notice requested nominations of individuals for membership on the committees who could represent the interests of key stakeholder constituencies on each committee. The TEACH Grant Committee met to develop proposed regulations twice during the month of January, 2008 and once in early February, 2008. This NPRM proposes regulations relating to the administration of the TEACH Grant program. The Department developed a list of proposed regulatory provisions for the TEACH Grant program from advice and recommendations submitted by individuals and organizations in testimony submitted to the Department in a series of three public hearings held on: November 2, 2007, at the Sheraton New Orleans, New Orleans, Louisiana. November 16, 2007, at the U.S. Department of Education in Washington, DC. November 29, 2007, at the Manchester Grand Hyatt San Diego, San Diego, California. In addition, the Department accepted written comments on possible regulatory provisions submitted directly to the Department by interested parties and organizations. A summary of all comments received orally and in writing is posted as background material in the docket. Transcripts of the regional meetings can be accessed at http://www.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2008/index2008.html. Staff within the Department also identified issues for discussion and negotiation. At its first meeting, the TEACH Grant Committee reached agreement on its protocols and proposed agenda. These protocols provided that the non-Federal negotiators would participate in the negotiated rulemaking process based on their experience and expertise. The TEACH Grant Committee included the following members: Dr. Nell Ingram, Dallas Independent School District and Judy Corcillo (alternate), National Association for Alternative Certification. Donna Harris-Aikens, National Education Association and James Rice (alternate), Quinsigamond Community College. Dr. William H. Graves, III, Darden College of Education, Old Dominion University and Dr. J. Roberts Hendricks (alternate), College of Education, University of Arizona. Dr. Sandra Robinson, College of Education, University of Central Florida and Dr. Jane West (alternate), American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. Joseph Pettibon, Texas A&M University and Beth Stack (alternate), University of Pittsburgh. Dr. Herbert Brunkhorst, California State University San Bernardino and Janis Lariviere (alternate), Teacher Development Center for Science Education, University of Kansas. Janet Dodson, Doane College and Bernard A. Pekala, Jr. (alternate), Boston College. Ellis Salim, Baker College and Maureen Budetti (alternate), National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities. Scott Fleming, Georgetown University and Thomas O'Neill (alternate), Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Nebraska. Mary Dorrell, Career Education Corporation and Tammy Halligan (alternate), Career College Association. Patrick Moore, Delaware Technical and Community College. Jim Hermes, American Association of Community Colleges and Julia Brown (alternate), Northern Virginia Community College. Carmen Berkley, United States Student Association and Cedric Lawson (alternate), United Council of University of Wisconsin Students. Terry Hartle, American Council on Education and Cyndy Littlefield (alternate), Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities. Gail McLarnon, U.S. Department of Education. During its meetings, the TEACH Grant Committee reviewed and discussed drafts of proposed regulations. At the final meeting in February 2008, the TEACH Grant Committee reached consensus on all of the proposed regulations in this document. More information on the work of the TEACH Grant Committee can be found at: http://www.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2008/teach.html. The Secretary bases these proposed regulations for the TEACH Grant program on the regulations of the Federal Pell Grant program or the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) program as appropriate given the similar nature of these programs. Like the Federal Pell Grant program, the TEACH Grant program provides for direct grants from the Federal government to students to assist in paying their college expenses. However, unlike the Federal Pell Grant program, the TEACH Grant program requires grant recipients to complete a service obligation consisting of four years of teaching in a high-need field at a low-income elementary or secondary school within eight years of completing the program of study for which the TEACH Grant was given. If a recipient fails to complete this service obligation, the TEACH Grant converts to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan. Under the proposed regulations, the Secretary would deliver funds using the same system as used for the Federal Pell Grant and Direct Loan programs. This will allow the coordination of administrative requirements and will assist participating institutions in administering the program, reduce the institutional administrative burden and paperwork, and simplify the application process for students. Accordingly, these proposed regulations would include the following definitions, without changes, from the Federal Pell Grant program regulations in 34 CFR 690.2: Institutional Student Information Record (ISIR) Payment Data Student Aid Report (SAR) In addition, the substance of proposed Sec. Sec. 686.5, 686.22(a) through (f), 686.25, 686.30, 686.33, 686.34, 686.35, 686.36 and 686.38 reflect the Pell Grant requirements in 34 CFR 690.8, 690.63(a) through (f), 690.66, 690.71, 690.76, 690.79, 690.80(a) and (b), 690.81, and 690.82. We have included these specific Pell Grant requirements in the text of the proposed TEACH Grant regulations to provide a complete description in part 686 of the program-specific requirements for the TEACH Grant program. Other sections of the proposed TEACH Grant program regulations reflect the Federal Pell Grant program requirements and the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan program requirements to the extent practicable. Significant Proposed Regulations We group major issues according to subject, with appropriate sections of the proposed regulations referenced in parenthesis. We discuss substantive issues under the sections of the proposed regulations to which they pertain. Late Disbursements (Sec. 668.164(g)) Statute: The HEA does not specifically address the issue of late disbursements of TEACH Grants. [[Page 15338]] Proposed Regulations: Current 34 CFR 668.164(g) allows a student who is no longer eligible to receive Title IV, HEA program funds to qualify for those funds if certain conditions are satisfied; for example, the institution receiving a SAR or an ISIR with an official expected family contribution. Current Sec. 668.164(g) also specifies the affected programs. The proposed regulations would add the TEACH Grant program to the list in Sec. 668.164(g) of programs for which a student becomes ineligible when the student is no longer enrolled at the institution for the award year. The proposed regulations would also describe how TEACH Grant recipients may qualify for a late disbursement. Reason: For a student to be considered eligible for a late disbursement of Title IV aid, the institution must have received a SAR or an ISIR with an official expected family contribution (EFC) and must originate the award before the student became ineligible. For TEACH Grant purposes, "originate" means that the student meets the eligibility requirements of Sec. 686.11, including signing the service agreement. Calculating and Applying Cohort Default Rates (Sec. 668.183) Statute: Section 435(m) of the HEA defines cohort default rate calculation procedures. Proposed Regulations: We are proposing to amend current 34 CFR 668.183 to specify that for purposes of calculating an institution's cohort default rate, a TEACH Grant that has been converted to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan is not included. Reason: In the case of a student whose TEACH Grant is converted to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan and who defaults on that loan, the Secretary does not believe that the loan should be included in the institution's cohort default rate calculation. The TEACH Grant award is originally made to the student as a grant and converts to a loan only after the student takes (or fails to take) certain actions. This conversion may occur many years after the award is made. Including the loan in the calculation of the rate at this stage in the process would not serve the purposes of the cohort default rate. The cohort default rates are a measure of an institution's administrative capability to control defaults to the extent the rates are calculated on data reasonably related to the period of a student's attendance at an institution. The conversion of TEACH Grants to Direct Loans will generally occur at a significantly later point in time than would be reasonable to include in an institution's cohort default rate. Overaward (Sec. 673.5) Statute: Section 420M(c)(2) of the HEA provides that the TEACH Grant, in combination with Federal assistance and other student assistance, may not exceed the student's cost of attendance. Proposed Regulations: We are proposing to amend current 34 CFR 673.5(c) to include the amount of any TEACH Grant in the types of funds that may be used to replace a student's EFC and to clarify that any amount in excess of a student's EFC is considered estimated financial assistance. Reason: TEACH Grants are not awarded based on need and therefore are permitted to replace a student's EFC. As with other forms of aid that may replace EFC, any TEACH Grant amount in excess of the EFC is considered estimated financial assistance. Part 686--Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program Definitions (Sec. 686.2) Academic Year or Its Equivalent for Elementary and Secondary Schools (Elementary or Secondary Academic Year) Statute: Section 420N(b)(1)(A) of the HEA provides that a grant recipient must serve as a full-time teacher for a total of not less than four academic years within eight years after completing the program of study for which he or she received a TEACH grant. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would provide a definition of academic year or its equivalent for elementary and secondary schools (elementary or secondary academic year) for purposes of the TEACH Grant program. An academic year for elementary and secondary schools would be one complete school year or two complete and consecutive half-years from different school years, excluding summer sessions, that generally fall within a 12-month period. If a school has a year-round program of instruction, the Secretary would consider a minimum of nine consecutive months to be the equivalent of an academic year. Reasons: This proposed definition is adopted from the definition of the term "academic year" used for purposes of determining teacher loan forgiveness in the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) program regulations in 34 CFR 682.215(b). Using the same definition for the TEACH Grant program would ensure equity in that the service performed by participants in both of these programs would be calculated in the same manner. Several non-Federal negotiators suggested removing the word "consecutive" from the first paragraph of the definition and eliminating the exclusion of summer sessions. The Secretary believes that these suggested changes would effectively allow a grant recipient to complete the four-year service obligation in less than four years, contrary to the TEACH Grant provisions in the statute. The Secretary is further concerned that full-time teaching in a summer session is not equivalent to full-time teaching in a regular school term. Some non-Federal negotiators requested that the term "consecutive" be removed from the second paragraph of the definition, which deals with a year-round program of instruction. These negotiators expressed concern that, because some year-round calendars punctuate the months of instruction with breaks of several weeks in length, year- round calendars may not technically meet the requirement for a minimum of nine consecutive months to be the equivalent of an academic year. The Department has decided not to remove the word "consecutive" because that would make this definition inconsistent with the one used for purposes of the teacher loan forgiveness in the FFEL program. That definition has been in use for several years without causing any difficulties. However, the Secretary would consider nine months of full-time teaching within a 12-month period in a year-round program the equivalent of an academic year for purposes of the TEACH Grant program. Annual Award and Scheduled Award Statute: Section 420M(a)(1) of the HEA establishes $4,000 as the amount a TEACH Grant-eligible student may receive for a year, and section 420M(c)(1) of the HEA provides that awards for part-time attendance are reduced in proportion to a student's less-than-full-time enrollment status. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define the term Scheduled Award as the maximum amount of a TEACH Grant that a full-time student could receive for a year and the term an annual award as the maximum TEACH Grant amount a student would receive for enrolling as a full-time, three-quarter-time, half-time, or less-than-half-time student and remaining in that enrollment status for a year. Reason: These definitions, in conjunction with the provisions of subpart C of the proposed regulations (Determination of Awards) would [[Page 15339]] ensure compliance with the statutory requirements that a TEACH Grant- eligible student receive an award of $4,000 for attendance during a year and that a student's payments be adjusted based on the student's enrollment status during a payment period. Elementary School Statute: Section 420N(b)(1)(A) and (B) of the HEA provides that a TEACH Grant recipient must serve as a full-time teacher for a total of not less than four academic years within eight years after completing the course of study for which he or she received a TEACH Grant in an elementary or secondary school that serves low-income students. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would provide a definition of elementary school for TEACH Grant purposes. The term elementary school would be defined as a nonprofit institutional day or residential school, including a public elementary charter school, which provides elementary education, as determined under State law. Reason: This proposed definition, which would implement the statutory requirement that a TEACH Grant recipient teach in an elementary or secondary school, is from section 9101(18) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). High-Need Field Statute: Section 420N(b)(1)(C) of the HEA provides that a grant recipient must teach in one of the high-need fields of mathematics, science, a foreign language, bilingual education, special education, as a reading specialist or in another field documented as high-need by the Federal Government, State government, or local educational agency (LEA), and approved by the Secretary. Section 420N(a)(2)(B)(i) identifies English language acquisition as a high-need field. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define the term high-need field for the purposes of the TEACH Grant program. A high- need field would include bilingual education and English language acquisition, foreign language, mathematics, reading specialist, science, special education, and any other field documented as high-need by the Federal Government, a State government or an LEA, and approved by the Secretary and listed in the Department's annual Teacher Shortage Area Nationwide Listing (Nationwide List). Reason: This proposed definition would implement the statutory requirement that, to meet the service obligation, a TEACH Grant recipient must teach in a high-need field. Highly-Qualified Statute: Section 420N(b)(1)(E) of the HEA provides that a TEACH Grant recipient must comply with the requirements for being a highly- qualified teacher, as defined in section 9101 of the ESEA. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define the term highly-qualified for purposes of the TEACH Grant program. The term would have the meaning set forth in section 9101(23) of the ESEA or in section 602(10) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Reason: This proposed definition would implement the statutory requirement that a TEACH Grant recipient serve as a highly-qualified teacher. The Secretary considers it appropriate to use the definition of highly-qualified from the ESEA for teachers in all of the high-need fields listed in the HEA with the exception of special education teachers. Special education teachers must satisfy the definition of highly-qualified in section 602(10) of the IDEA. Numeric Equivalent Statute: Section 420N(a)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the HEA provides that a student may be eligible for a TEACH Grant based, in part, on a grade point average (GPA) comparable to a 3.25 average on a 4.0 scale under standards prescribed by the Secretary. Proposed regulations: Under proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v), a student may be eligible for a TEACH Grant based on a cumulative GPA at an institution (or, in the case of a first year student, at a secondary school) of at least 3.25 on a 4.0 scale, or the numeric equivalent. We are proposing to define the term numeric equivalent, for purposes of the TEACH Grant program, in a manner consistent with the definition of that term in 34 CFR 691.15(g) of the Academic Competitiveness Grant (ACG) program and National Science and Mathematics Access to Retain Talent (SMART) Grant program regulations. As in the ACG and National SMART Grant programs, to determine a numeric equivalent, an institution that has one or more academic programs that measure academic performance using alternatives to standard numeric grading procedures would be required to develop and apply an academically defensible equivalency policy with a numeric scale for purposes of determining student eligibility. That equivalency policy would need to be in writing and available to students upon request. The policy would also need to include clear differentiations of student performance to support a determination that a student has performed, in his or her TEACH Grant-eligible program, at a level commensurate with at least a 3.25 GPA on a 4.0 scale. Generally, a grading policy that includes only "satisfactory/unsatisfactory", "pass/fail", or other similar nonnumeric assessments would not be a numeric equivalent under the proposed regulations. However, such assessments would be considered numeric equivalents if the institution could demonstrate that the "pass" or "satisfactory" standard has the numeric equivalent of at least a 3.25 GPA on a 4.0 scale, or that a student's performance for tests and assignments yielded a numeric equivalent of a 3.25 GPA on a 4.0 scale. Under the proposed definition of the term numeric equivalent, the institution's equivalency policies would need to be consistent with any other standards that the institution may have developed for academic and other Title IV, HEA program purposes, such as graduate school applications and scholarship eligibility, to the extent such standards distinguish among various levels of a student's academic performance. Reason: During negotiated rulemaking, the non-Federal negotiators requested clarification of the term "numeric equivalent" as it is used to determine comparability to a 3.25 GPA on a 4.0 scale. We agreed to incorporate the definition of the term as it is used in the ACG and National SMART Grant programs. The ACG and National SMART Grant programs have GPA requirements that are similar to those of TEACH Grants in that students are required to maintain minimum GPAs to retain eligibility for a TEACH Grant. The Department has had a successful experience implementing the ACG/National SMART Grant programs' definition of "numeric equivalent," and thus believes that this definition should be applied to GPA calculations for the TEACH Grant program. In addition, maintaining a consistent definition between programs minimizes burden for institutions and provides a consistent standard between programs. Post-Baccalaureate Program Statute: Section 420L(2) of the HEA defines post-baccalaureate as a program of instruction for teacher candidates who have completed a baccalaureate degree, that does not lead to a graduate degree, and that consists of courses required by a State in order for a teacher candidate to receive a professional certification or licensing credential that [[Page 15340]] is required for employment as a teacher in an elementary school or secondary school in that State, but does not include any program of instruction offered by a TEACH Grant-eligible institution that offers a baccalaureate degree in education. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define the term post-baccalaureate program for purposes of the TEACH Grant program using the statutory language and stating that a post-baccalaureate program would be treated as an undergraduate program for TEACH Grant purposes. Reason: This proposed definition is necessary to implement the HEA and to clarify that the Secretary considers a post-baccalaureate program to be an undergraduate program for TEACH Grant purposes. Retiree Statute: Section 420N(2)(B)(i) of the HEA provides that a retiree from another occupation with expertise in a field in which there is a shortage of teachers who is pursuing a master's degree to prepare to teach would be eligible for a TEACH Grant. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define the term retiree, for purposes of the TEACH Grant program, as an individual who has decided to change his or her occupation for any reason and who has expertise, as determined by the institution, in a high-need field. Reason: This proposed definition would implement the statutory provision specifying that individuals who are seeking a master's degree and are retirees from another occupation with expertise in a field in which there is a shortage of teachers may be eligible for a TEACH Grant. School Serving Low-Income Students (Low-Income School) Statute: Section 420N(b)(1)(B) of the HEA provides that a TEACH Grant recipient must agree to teach in a school described in section 465(a)(2)(A) of the HEA. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define a school serving low-income students (low-income school), for purposes of the TEACH Grant program, as an elementary or secondary school that is in the school district of an LEA that is eligible for assistance pursuant to Title I of the ESEA; that has been determined by the Secretary to be a school in which more than 30 percent of the school's total enrollment is made up of children who qualify for services provided under Title I of the ESEA; and that is listed in the Department's Annual Directory of Designated Low-Income Schools for Teacher Cancellation Benefits. The Secretary would consider all elementary and secondary schools operated by the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) or operated on Indian reservations by Indian tribal groups under contract or grant with the BIE to qualify as schools serving low-income students. Reason: The proposed definition is drawn from section 465(a)(2)(A) of the HEA, which provides for loan cancellation for teachers in the Federal Perkins Loan Program. The non-Federal negotiators questioned whether the designation of a low-income school would be made by the school district or by the individual school. As is clearly specified in section 465(a)(2)(A) of the HEA, the designation of a low-income school is made at the level of the individual school. Secondary School Statute: Section 420N(b)(1)(A) and (B) of the HEA provides that a TEACH Grant recipient must serve as a full-time teacher in an elementary or secondary school that serves low-income students for a total of not less than four academic years within eight years after completing the course of study for which he or she received a TEACH Grant. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define the term secondary school, for TEACH Grant purposes, as a secondary school would be a nonprofit institutional day or residential school, including a public secondary charter school, that provides secondary education, as determined under State law, but does not include any education beyond grade 12. Reason: This proposed definition, which is taken from section 9101(38) of the ESEA, would implement the statutory requirement that a TEACH Grant recipient teach in an elementary or secondary school. Service Agreement Statute: Section 420N(b) of the HEA provides that each applicant for a TEACH Grant must sign an agreement to serve as a full-time teacher in a low-income school in a high-need field for a total of not less than four academic years within eight years after completing the course of study for which the individual received a TEACH Grant, submit evidence of such employment in the form of a certification by the chief administrative officer of the school upon completion of each year of service, and comply with the requirements for being a highly-qualified teacher. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define the term service agreement, for purposes of the TEACH Grant program, as an agreement under which the individual receiving a TEACH Grant commits to meet the service obligation described in Sec. 686.12 and to comply with the notification requirements and other provisions of the agreement. Reason: This proposed definition would implement the statutory requirement that a service agreement accompany each TEACH Grant application. TEACH Grant-Eligible Institution Statute: Section 420L(1) and (2) of the HEA provides that an eligible institution for purposes of the TEACH Grant program is an institution of higher education as defined in section 102 of the HEA that is financially responsible and that provides: High-quality teacher preparation and professional development services, including extensive clinical experience as part of pre-service preparation; pedagogical coursework, or assistance in the provision of such coursework; and supervision and support services to teachers, or assistance in the provision of such services, or that provides a post-baccalaureate program of instruction. Proposed Regulations: The proposed definition of TEACH Grant- eligible institution in Sec. 686.2 would implement the statutory requirement that an institution must be financially responsible by using the current standards for institutions participating in the Title IV HEA programs in 34 CFR part 668, subpart L. Under the proposed definition, an institution must meet this financial responsibility requirement and provide a high-quality teacher preparation program at the baccalaureate or master's degree level that is (1) accredited by a specialized accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary for the accreditation of professional teacher education programs; or (2) approved by a State, includes extensive pre-service clinical experience, and provides pedagogical coursework, or the assistance in the provision of such coursework. In both cases, the institution must provide supervision and support services to teachers or assist in the provision of services to teachers. Under the proposed definition of TEACH Grant-eligible institution, an institution that is financially responsible would also be eligible to participate in the TEACH Grant program under any of the following conditions: (A) The institution offers a post-baccalaureate program but not a [[Page 15341]] baccalaureate teacher preparation program. (B) The institution offers a baccalaureate degree that, in combination with other training or experience, will prepare an individual to teach in a high-need field and has entered into an agreement with a TEACH Grant-eligible institution that offers a teacher preparation program or one that offers a post-baccalaureate program. (C) The institution provides either a two-year program that is acceptable for full credit toward a high-quality baccalaureate teacher preparation program at a TEACH Grant-eligible institution, as demonstrated by the institutions, or a two-year program that is acceptable for full credit toward a baccalaureate degree in a high-need field at a TEACH Grant-eligible institution, as demonstrated by the institutions. Reasons: For TEACH Grant purposes, section 420L of the HEA specifies that an eligible institution must be financially responsible. Unlike the current regulations that allow an institution that is not financially responsible to continue to participate in all of the other title IV, HEA programs under an alternate financial standard in Sec. 668.175, the proposed regulations would not permit that institution to participate in the TEACH Grant program under alternate standards in Sec. 668.175(d)(1)(ii), (f), or (g). The proposed definition of TEACH Grant-eligible institution would make several kinds of institutions TEACH Grant-eligible. In some cases eligibility would be based on an institution's offering a teacher preparation program. In other cases, eligibility would be based on the relationships institutions establish with one another. This would provide for several pathways for students to acquire the education and knowledge needed to serve as highly-qualified teachers in high-need fields. One such pathway would be completion of a baccalaureate or master's degree teacher preparation program. The Department initially considered requiring that the teacher preparation program offered by an institution be accredited by a specialized accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary for the accreditation of teacher education programs or be approved by a State. However, because section 420L(1)(A) of the HEA stipulates that teacher preparation must include extensive clinical experience, and some States approve programs that do not include extensive clinical experience, the Department proposes instead that a teacher preparation program must either be accredited by a specialized accrediting agency or approved by a State and include extensive pre-service clinical experience and pedagogical coursework. The proposed definition of TEACH Grant-eligible program would clarify that, in order to be eligible under this program, an institution offering a teacher preparation program must also provide supervision and support services to teachers, or assist in the provision of services to teachers. Several non-Federal negotiators noted that most institutions do not directly supervise teachers in the classroom, if the term "supervise" is understood in the employment sense. However, institutions do provide services in the form of providing information and resources to teachers and school districts, and direct observation and coaching, to strengthen the classroom performance of novice teachers. The definition of TEACH Grant-eligible program includes examples of the kinds of services that an institution might offer as its supervision and support services. A second pathway for a student to prepare to teach in a high-need field would be either completion of a baccalaureate program at one institution and a master's level teacher preparation program at another institution or a post-baccalaureate program at an institution that does not offer a teacher preparation program. Under the proposed definition, in order for the first institution to be eligible, it would need to have entered into an agreement with an institution offering a teacher preparation program or a post-baccalaureate program. Two pathways are identified for students who initially enroll in a two-year institution. The Department initially considered making such an institution eligible if it offered a program that was fully transferable to a four-year TEACH Grant-eligible institution offering a teacher preparation program or one offering a baccalaureate program in a high-need field. The non-Federal negotiators recommended using the phrase "acceptable for full credit toward a baccalaureate degree" in place of "fully transferable to a four-year institution." We used the language recommended by the non-Federal negotiators in the proposed definition because it would mirror language from section 101 of the HEA. We would consider that an institution meets this requirement if it can demonstrate upon the request of the Secretary that its two-year program is fully-acceptable by at least one four-year institution. Examples of documents institutions might use to demonstrate that the two-year program is acceptable for full credit toward a baccalaureate program would include both formal articulation agreements with four- year institutions and actual student records demonstrating that four- year institutions fully accept transfer credits from the two-year institution. TEACH Grant-Eligible Program Statute: The HEA does not define the term eligible program for the TEACH Grant program. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define the term TEACH Grant-eligible program as an eligible program as defined in 34 CFR 668.8 that is a program of study that prepares an individual to teach in a high-need field and that leads to a baccalaureate or master's degree, or is a post-baccalaureate program of study. Under the proposed definition for the term TEACH Grant-eligible program, a two- year program of study that is acceptable for full credit toward a baccalaureate degree would be considered to be a program of study that leads to a baccalaureate degree. Reasons: The proposed definition is based on provisions in section 420L of the HEA and the proposed definition of TEACH Grant-eligible institution in proposed Sec. 686.2. While supporting the definition, some non-Federal negotiators were concerned that it would not be readily apparent to students which programs at an institution would be TEACH Grant-eligible programs because of the various pathways that a student might follow in preparing to teach as a highly-qualified teacher in a high-need field. The Department believes that each institution would need to define which of its programs would be TEACH Grant-eligible programs. A couple of the non-Federal negotiators suggested that their institutions would likely require students to develop an academic plan indicating how they would gain the education needed to begin a teaching career as a highly-qualified teacher in a high-need field. Based on that plan, they would be able to determine whether the student's program of study meets the definition requirements of a TEACH Grant-eligible program. Other non-Federal negotiators agreed and suggested that it would be helpful to include the appropriate academic departments in the review of academic plans. All members of the negotiating committee agreed that these suggestions made sense. Teacher Statute: The HEA does not define the term teacher. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define the term teacher [[Page 15342]] for purposes of the TEACH Grant program as a person who provides direct classroom teaching or classroom-type teaching in a non-classroom setting, including special education teachers and reading specialists. Reason: The proposed definition of teacher in Sec. 686.2 is taken from the FFEL program regulations for teacher loan forgiveness in 34 CFR 682.215. The Secretary believes that it would be appropriate to use the same definition for both the TEACH Grant program and the FFEL teacher loan forgiveness program. Under the proposed definition, the term would not include counselors, administrators or other types of school personnel who may be listed in the Department's annual Teacher Shortage Area Nationwide Listing but who do not provide classroom or classroom-type teaching. Teacher Preparation Program Statute: Section 420L of the HEA refers to teacher preparation program in the context of an eligible institution. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.2 would define the term teacher preparation program, for TEACH Grant program purposes, as a State-approved course of study, the completion of which signifies that a student has met all the State's educational or training requirements for initial certification or licensure to teach in the State's elementary or secondary schools. Under this definition, a teacher preparation program could be a regular program or an alternative route to certification, as defined by the State. Under the proposed definition, the teacher preparation program must be provided by an institution of higher education. Reason: The proposed definition of teacher preparation program would be adopted from the Reporting Reference and User Manual, the accountability system mandated under Title II (sections 207 and 208) of the HEA. The manual, which was subject to public comment, has been in use since 2000. Using the same definition in the TEACH Grant program would ensure consistency across programs that focus on enhancing teacher quality. Duration of Student Eligibility (Sec. 686.3) Statute: Section 420M(d)(1) and (2) of the HEA provides that the maximum amount an undergraduate or post-baccalaureate student may receive in TEACH Grants is $16,000 and that the maximum amount a graduate student may receive in TEACH Grants is $8,000. Proposed Regulations: Section 686.3 of the proposed regulations would implement the statutory maximums. An undergraduate or post- baccalaureate student would be eligible to receive the equivalent of up to four Scheduled Awards during the period required for the completion of the first undergraduate TEACH Grant-eligible baccalaureate program of study and the first post-baccalaureate program of study combined. A graduate student would be eligible to receive the equivalent of up to two Scheduled Awards during the period required for the completion of a TEACH Grant-eligible master's degree program of study. Reason: The proposed regulations would implement the statutory requirements related to the duration of student eligibility from section 420M(d)(1) and (2) of the HEA. Institutional Participation (Sec. 686.4) Statute: The HEA does not specify whether an institution is required to participate in the TEACH Grant program. Proposed Regulations: Section 686.4 of the proposed regulations would provide that a TEACH Grant-eligible institution that offers one or more TEACH Grant-eligible programs may elect to participate in the TEACH Grant program. If an institution begins participation in the TEACH Grant program during an award year, a student enrolled at and attending that institution would be eligible to receive a TEACH grant for the payment period during which the institution begins participation and any subsequent payment period. An institution may cease to participate in the TEACH Grant program or may become ineligible to participate in the TEACH Grant program during an award year. A student who was attending the institution and who submitted a SAR with an official EFC to the institution, or for whom the institution obtained an ISIR with an official EFC, before the date the institution became ineligible would still be eligible to receive a TEACH Grant for the award year. The student would be eligible for the payment periods that the student completed before the institution ceased participation or became ineligible to participate and the payment period in which the institution ceased participation or became ineligible to participate. An institution that ceases to participate in the TEACH Grant program or becomes ineligible to participate in the TEACH Grant program would be required to provide to the Secretary, within 45 days after the effective date of the loss of eligibility: (1) The name and other student identifiers of each eligible student under Sec. 686.11 who, during the award year, submitted a SAR with an official EFC to the institution or for whom it obtained an ISIR with an official EFC before it ceased to participate in the TEACH Grant program or became ineligible to participate; (2) the amount of TEACH Grant funds paid to each student during the award year; (3) the amount due each student eligible to receive a TEACH Grant through the end of the payment period during which the institution ceased to participate in the TEACH Grant program or became ineligible to participate; and (4) an accounting of the TEACH Grant program expenditures for that award year to the date of termination. Reasons: The proposed regulations for this section would generally follow the Federal Pell Grant Program regulations in 34 CFR 690.7. Using these established procedures and processes that are already understood by institutions would simplify delivery for institutions and reduce institutional burden. Enrollment Status for Students Taking Regular and Correspondence Courses (Sec. 686.5) Statute: The HEA does not specifically address enrollment status for regular and correspondence courses. Proposed Regulations: Section 686.5 of the proposed regulations would specify how an institution would treat correspondence courses for purposes of the TEACH Grant program. In determining a student's enrollment status, an institution could include correspondence courses a student takes from either his or her own institution or from another institution having an arrangement for this purpose with the student's institution. Except as specified in proposed Sec. 686.5(c), the correspondence work that could be included in determining a student's enrollment status would be that amount of work that: (a) Applies toward a student's degree or post-baccalaureate program of study or is remedial work taken by the student to help in his or her TEACH Grant-eligible program; (b) is completed within the period of time required for regular coursework; and (c) does not exceed the amount of a student's regular coursework for the payment period for which enrollment status is being calculated. Under proposed Sec. 686.5(c), a student who would be a half-time student based solely on his or her correspondence work would be considered a half-time student unless the calculation in the preceding paragraph produces an enrollment status greater than half-time. A student who would be a less-than-half-time student based solely on his or [[Page 15343]] her correspondence work or a combination of correspondence work and regular coursework would be considered a less-than-half-time student. Reason: As is the case with the Federal Pell Grant Program, a student's award for a TEACH Grant is considered to be awarded based on the student's enrollment status. Accordingly, we believe it is appropriate for proposed Sec. 686.5 to follow the corresponding Federal Pell Grant Program regulations in 34 CFR 690.8 for determining enrollment status for students taking correspondence courses. Payment From More Than One Institution (Sec. 686.6) Statute: The HEA does not address the issue of receipt of TEACH Grants from more than one institution. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.6 would stipulate that a student may not receive TEACH Grant payments concurrently from more than one institution. Reason: Under the Federal Pell Grant program and the ACG and National SMART Grant programs, a student cannot receive payments from more than one institution at the same time. To ensure coordination with the Federal Pell Grant program and the ACG and National SMART Grant programs programs, proposed Sec. 686.6 would provide that a student can only receive a TEACH Grant from one institution for the same payment period. Application (Sec. 686.10) Statute: Section 420N(a) of the HEA contains the student eligibility requirements for the TEACH Grant program. Section 420N(a)(1) requires that to receive a TEACH Grant, a student must apply. Section 420N(a)(2) provides for additional information that a student may need to submit as part of the application process. Section 420N(b) provides that a service agreement must accompany the application. In addition, the TEACH Grant program, along with the other Title IV, HEA programs, is subject to the provisions of section 483 of the HEA, which establishes a common financial aid form for these programs. Proposed Regulations: Section 686.10 of the proposed regulations would specify the procedures that a student must follow when applying for a TEACH Grant, and in particular, would require that a student must submit a Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA); complete and sign a service agreement and promise to repay; and provide any additional information requested by the Secretary. Reasons: Under section 483(a) of the HEA, the FAFSA is the standard form used by all students applying for Title IV, HEA program aid. Although the TEACH Grant program is not need-based, using the FAFSA and procedures that are similar to those used in the Federal Pell Grant program would enable institutions to make a determination of student eligibility for the TEACH Grant program until a streamlined application can be developed. Completion of a service agreement and promise to repay are considered to be part of the application process. Further requirements regarding the service agreement would be set forth in proposed Sec. 686.12. The promise to repay describes the terms and conditions of the Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan to which the TEACH Grant is converted if the grant recipient fails to meet the service obligation. Finally, the regulations provide for the collection of additional information, such as test scores, to ensure that students are eligible. Eligibility to Receive a Grant (Sec. 686.11) Undergraduate, Post-Baccalaureate, and Graduate Students Statute: Section 420N(a) of the HEA provides student eligibility requirements for the TEACH Grant program. Proposed Regulations: Section 686.11(a)(1)(i) through (iv) of these proposed regulations would set forth the TEACH Grant student eligibility requirements common to all students who are enrolled in undergraduate, post-baccalaureate, and graduate programs. All students would have to meet the student eligibility requirements under 34 CFR part 668, subpart C; have submitted a completed application along with a signed service agreement; and be enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible institution in a TEACH Grant-eligible program. All students would also be required to be completing coursework and other requirements necessary to begin a career in teaching or plan to do so before graduating. Reason: An otherwise eligible student remains eligible for a TEACH Grant as long as that student is still completing coursework and other requirements necessary to begin a career in teaching or plans to complete such coursework and requirements prior to graduating. However, simply graduating from a program does not necessarily mean the same as completing all of the coursework necessary to begin a career in teaching. For example, a student may graduate with an undergraduate degree, but must complete a post-baccalaureate program or other coursework before the student can begin a career in teaching. Thus, where the proposed regulations refer to completion of coursework and other requirements before graduating, the Secretary would interpret the term "graduating" to mean the point at which the student has completed all the coursework and other requirements necessary to prepare that student to begin a career in teaching. Statute: Section 420N(a) of the HEA provides student eligibility requirements for the TEACH Grant program. Section 420N(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the HEA contains requirements related to academic achievement that enrolled students receiving TEACH Grants must meet. Proposed Regulations: Section 686.11(a)(1)(v) of the proposed regulations would set forth additional TEACH Grant student eligibility requirements. Proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(E) would stipulate that all students, regardless of postsecondary level, may qualify for a TEACH Grant by scoring above the 75th percentile of scores on at least one of the batteries from a nationally-normed standardized undergraduate, graduate, or post-baccalaureate admissions test. The student's test score would be compared to the test score achieved by all students taking the same test during the same period the student took the test. Students who do not meet this requirement must meet the GPA requirements under proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(A) through (D) to either initially qualify for or maintain eligibility for a TEACH Grant. Reason: Proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(E) would implement the statutory requirement under section 420N(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II) of the HEA that a student may qualify for a TEACH Grant by displaying high academic aptitude as demonstrated by scoring above the 75th percentile on at least one battery on a standardized admissions test. Thus, for example, a student who scored above the 75th percentile on the math section of the SAT Reasoning Test (SAT), but who scored below the 75th percentile on the other sections of the SAT, could qualify for a TEACH Grant, if otherwise eligible, because the student displayed high academic aptitude by scoring above the 75th percentile on one of the SAT batteries. The proposed regulations would not restrict the applicability of qualifying test scores by educational level. A qualifying test score from an undergraduate admissions test could qualify an otherwise eligible student for a TEACH Grant regardless of whether the student would be an undergraduate [[Page 15344]] or graduate student. The proposed regulations would also not place a limit on the period of time that has elapsed since the student earned the qualifying test score. The qualifying test score is intended to demonstrate high academic aptitude and the negotiators believed that there is no reason to suppose that there would be a time limitation on such demonstration of academic aptitude or that one should be set. An otherwise eligible student who qualified with a test score would not need to meet additional GPA requirements to retain eligibility for a TEACH Grant. However, tests used exclusively as placement tests by the institution could not be used to qualify a student for a TEACH Grant. Proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(A)(1) would implement the statutory provision that a student in the first year of a program of undergraduate education can qualify for a TEACH Grant with a cumulative secondary school GPA of 3.25 on a 4.0 scale, or the numeric equivalent. A student qualifying with such a GPA for the first year would need to meet additional GPA requirements to retain eligibility for a TEACH Grant once that student is beyond the first year of his or her undergraduate program. Proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(A)(2), (B), (C), and (D) would implement the statutory requirement that a student who did not achieve the requisite test score under proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(E) must maintain a 3.25 GPA on a 4.0 scale, or the numeric equivalent, in order to maintain eligibility for a TEACH Grant. Under proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(A)(2), students in the first year of a program of undergraduate education, as determined by the institution, who did not qualify under proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(A)(1), would need to achieve an undergraduate GPA of 3.25 on a 4.0 scale, or the numeric equivalent, through the most recently completed payment period, to be eligible for a TEACH Grant. Similarly, under proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(B), a student beyond the first year of a program of undergraduate education (including a post-baccalaureate program), as determined by the institution, would need to maintain an undergraduate GPA of 3.25 on a 4.0 scale, or the numeric equivalent, through the most-recently completed payment period, to continue to be eligible. For graduate students, proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(C) would provide that the student may qualify for a TEACH Grant in the first payment period of graduate study based on a cumulative undergraduate GPA of at least 3.25 on a 4.0 scale, or the numeric equivalent. Under proposed Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v)(D), graduate students beyond the first payment period would need to achieve a cumulative graduate GPA of at least 3.25 on a 4.0 scale, or the numeric equivalent, through the most- recently completed payment period. Current or Former Teachers or Retirees (Sec. 686.11(b)) Statute: Section 420N(a) of the HEA provides student eligibility requirements for the TEACH Grant program. Section 420N(a)(2)(B) provides student eligibility requirements for students who are current or former teachers or retirees. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.11(b) would set forth the TEACH Grant student eligibility requirements for current or former teachers and retirees. A current or former teacher or retiree would need to meet the student eligibility requirements under 34 CFR part 668, subpart C and have submitted a completed application along with a signed service agreement, and be applying for a TEACH Grant to obtain a master's degree. The applicant would need to be a teacher or retiree or be a current or former teacher pursuing certification through a high- quality alternative certification route. The applicant also would need to be enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible institution in a TEACH Grant- eligible program during the time period required for completion of a master's degree. Reason: Proposed Sec. 686.11(b) would implement the statutory requirements related to student eligibility for current and former teachers and retirees in 420N(a)(2)(B) of the HEA. Transfer Student GPA (Sec. 686.11(c)) Statute: Section 420N(a)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the HEA provides that an undergraduate, post-baccalaureate or graduate student's eligibility for a TEACH Grant may be based on the student maintaining a cumulative GPA of at least 3.25 on a 4.0 scale. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.11(c) would be based on the transfer student GPA requirements in the National SMART Grant program for institutions that do or do not incorporate transfer grades from coursework accepted by the new institution, except that for purposes of the TEACH Grant program, the GPA would be calculated based on the coursework accepted by the institution on transfer without determination of whether the transferred coursework will actually be considered part of the TEACH Grant-eligible program. Reasons: The proposed regulations would ensure that a transfer student could meet the GPA requirement to receive a TEACH Grant for his or her first payment period at the institution to which the student has transferred by calculating the student's transfer GPA using a methodology similar to that already used by the institution to determine a transfer student's GPA for the National SMART Grant program. The Secretary believes that allowing the new institution to use grades assigned to coursework accepted by the new institution for initial GPA calculation purposes for that transfer student instead of using grades assigned only to coursework accepted into the TEACH Grant- eligible program would decrease the burden on institutions and students because institutions will not have to take the extra step of determining which of the transferred courses will actually apply to the TEACH Grant-eligible program at the time of the student's admission. Service Agreement (Sec. 686.12) Statute: Section 420N(b) requires that each application for a TEACH Grant contain or be accompanied by a service agreement. In accordance with section 420N(b)(1)(A) through (C) and (E) of the HEA, the service agreement must state that the TEACH Grant recipient will serve as a full-time teacher for a total of not less than four academic years within eight years of completing the course of study for which the applicant received a TEACH Grant in a low-income school as a highly- qualified teacher in a high-need field. Under section 420N(b)(1)(D) of the HEA, the service agreement must require the grant recipient to submit evidence of his or her service, upon completion of each year of such service, in the form of a certification by the chief administrative officer of the school in which the recipient is teaching. Lastly, section 420N(c) of the HEA provides that if the recipient fails or refuses to carry out the service obligation, any TEACH Grants received shall be treated as a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan under part D of Title IV of the HEA, with interest accruing from the date that each TEACH Grant was disbursed. Proposed Regulations: Section 686.12(a) of the proposed regulations would provide that an applicant may receive a TEACH Grant only after signing a service agreement and receiving counseling in accordance with proposed Sec. 686.32. Section 686.12(b) of the proposed regulations would describe the requirements a grant recipient must satisfy in order to fulfill the service obligation. The grant recipient must-- [[Page 15345]] Serve as a full-time teacher for a total of not less than four elementary or secondary academic years within eight calendar years after completing the program for which the recipient received the TEACH Grant or otherwise ceased enrollment; Teach in a low-income school; Be a highly-qualified teacher; Teach in a high-need field in the majority of classes taught during each elementary or secondary academic year; Submit documentation of such service each year certified by the chief administrative officer of the school in which the grant recipient teaches; and Comply with the terms, conditions, and other requirements of the proposed regulations in Sec. Sec. 686.40-686.43. Section 686.12(c) of the proposed regulations would (1) require the completion of a service obligation for each program of study for which the recipient received a TEACH Grant; (2) stipulate that such service obligation begins following the completion or other cessation of enrollment in a TEACH Grant-eligible program; and (3) provide that creditable teaching service may apply to more than one service obligation. Proposed Sec. 686.12(c) would provide that a grant recipient may request a suspension of the eight-year time period during which the service obligation must be completed in accordance with proposed Sec. 686.41. Lastly, proposed Sec. 686.12(d) would provide that a grant recipient who completes a TEACH Grant-eligible program in a high-need field listed in the Nationwide List cannot satisfy his or her service obligation to teach in that high-need field unless the field is listed in the Nationwide List for the State in which the grant recipient begins to teach at the time the recipient begins teaching. Reasons: The purpose of proposed Sec. 686.12 would be to implement the statutory requirements regarding the content of the service agreement and to serve as a source of information about the service obligations associated with the TEACH Grant program. The service agreement is a legally-binding document, the terms of which must be met for a TEACH Grant recipient to satisfy the service obligation. The service agreement contains information on the terms, conditions and other requirements in proposed Sec. Sec. 686.40 through 686.43 with which the grant recipient must comply, such as: how to document the service obligation; under what conditions a suspension of the eight- year period for completion of the service obligation may be granted; under what conditions a service agreement can be discharged; and under what conditions a TEACH Grant is converted to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan. In recognition of a recent trend to re-structure elementary schools on a Kindergarten-Eighth Grade model and to promote the math and science skills of elementary school teachers, one of the non-Federal negotiators proposed that the Department consider allowing a teacher to fulfill the requirement to teach in a high-need field if the majority of classes taught by the grant recipient were in a high-need field. This non-Federal negotiator believed that adopting such a policy would allow more elementary school teachers to benefit from the TEACH Grant program. The Department agreed. We reflect this suggestion in proposed Sec. 686.12(b)(1)(iii) and also in the proposed regulations on documenting the service obligation in Sec. 686.40(c)(1)(i) and (ii). Section 686.12(c)(1) of the proposed regulations would provide that creditable teaching service performed by a TEACH Grant recipient may apply to more than one service obligation. At the request of the non- Federal negotiators, we are including in this discussion several examples that illustrate when the application of creditable teaching service would apply to more than one service obligation. For instance, if a grant recipient completes a TEACH Grant-eligible program at a TEACH Grant-eligible institution and immediately enrolls in another TEACH Grant-eligible program at a TEACH Grant-eligible institution before beginning a career in teaching, the recipient may request a suspension of the eight-year time period under proposed Sec. 686.41(a)(1) for the period of enrollment in the subsequent program and upon completion of the subsequent program, apply all qualified teaching service to both service obligations. Another example would be when a grant recipient completes a TEACH Grant-eligible program at a TEACH Grant-eligible institution and begins qualified teaching service to meet the service obligation before enrolling in a subsequent TEACH Grant-eligible program. In this case, the recipient may request a suspension of the eight-year time period associated with the first service obligation under proposed Sec. 686.41(a)(1) for the period of enrollment in a subsequent program and, upon completion of the subsequent program, apply qualified teaching service performed after the completion of the subsequent program to both service obligations. The qualified teaching service performed before the suspension would count only toward fulfillment of the first service obligation. It is important to note that a TEACH grant recipient who fully satisfies the service obligation associated with the program for which TEACH Grants were received and subsequently enrolls in another TEACH Grant-eligible program cannot apply to the second service obligation any of the qualified service completed prior to enrolling in the subsequent program. Finally, a grant recipient who has completed a TEACH Grant-eligible program and who begins qualified full-time teaching service toward the service obligation associated with that program, and then concurrently enrolls in another TEACH Grant-eligible program may, upon completing the subsequent TEACH Grant-eligible program, apply only qualified teaching service performed after the completion of the subsequent TEACH Grant-eligible program to both service obligations. Because of the importance of the service agreement and because it is a source of information for the TEACH Grant recipient, several non- Federal negotiators believed that the agreement was the appropriate place to include language describing the risk a TEACH Grant recipient takes when majoring in a high-need field listed in the Nationwide List with the intent to teach in the high-need field upon completion of his or her program of study. The Department agreed. Therefore, we are proposing regulations in Sec. 686.12(d) (Service agreement) stating that a grant recipient who completes a TEACH Grant-eligible program in a high-need field listed in the Nationwide List cannot satisfy his or her service obligation to teach in that high-need field unless the high-need field in which he or she has prepared to teach continues to be listed for the State in which the grant recipient begins teaching in fulfillment of his or her service obligation. Submission Process and Deadline for a SAR or ISIR (Sec. 686.20) Statute: Section 420M provides that the Secretary shall pay a grant to each TEACH Grant-eligible student who files an application and a service agreement for attendance in a TEACH Grant-eligible program. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.20 would provide that, as in the Federal Pell Grant program, a student must submit a SAR, or the institution must receive an ISIR, within established deadlines. The Federal Pell Grant Program requires that the student's SAR or ISIR be a valid SAR or valid ISIR with an EFC based on accurate application information. Unlike the Federal Pell Grant program, proposed Sec. 686.20 [[Page 15346]] would provide that the SAR or ISIR need only be a record with an official EFC, i.e., an EFC computed by the Central Processing System (CPS) of the Department that may or may not be based on verified application information. Further, the proposed regulations, unlike the Federal Pell Grant program regulations, would not reference the deadlines for completing verification of application information under 34 CFR 668.60. Reason: Unlike the Federal Pell Grant program, the TEACH Grant program is not need-based. It would, therefore, not be necessary that an institution receive a valid SAR or valid ISIR, nor would it be necessary to subject the TEACH Grant program to the verification requirements under 34 CFR part 688, subpart E. However, to determine the amount of a student's TEACH Grant in accordance with Sec. 686.21(c), an institution would need an EFC based on accurate information even though the EFC is not computed by the CPS. Calculation of a Grant (Sec. 686.21) Maximum and Annual Award Amounts Statute: Section 420M(a)(1) of the HEA establishes $4,000 as the amount a TEACH Grant-eligible student may receive for a year, and section 420M(c)(1) of the HEA provides that awards for part-time attendance shall be reduced in proportion to a student's less-than- full-time enrollment status. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.21 would provide for a Scheduled Award of $4,000, the maximum amount a student may receive in a year, and annual awards of $4,000 for full-time enrollment status, $3,000 for three-quarter-time enrollment status, $2,000 for half-time enrollment status, and $1,000 for less-than-half-time enrollment status. Reason: The Secretary proposes to establish the TEACH Grant Scheduled Award and annual award amounts to implement the statutory requirements regarding maximum awards and awards for part-time attendance. Treatment in Relation to Other Aid Received (Sec. 686.21) Statute: Section 420M(c)(2) of the HEA provides that the amount of a student's TEACH Grant, in combination with Federal and other student financial assistance the student may receive, may not exceed the student's cost of attendance. Proposed Regulations: Section 686.21(c) of the proposed regulations would provide that a student's TEACH Grant, when combined with the student's Federal Pell Grant eligibility and other estimated financial assistance as defined in 34 CFR 673.5(c), may not exceed the student's cost of attendance under section 472 of the HEA. Further, proposed Sec. 686.21(d) would provide that a student's TEACH Grant may replace the student's EFC. Any amount in excess of the EFC would be considered estimated financial assistance as defined in 34 CFR 673.5(c). Reason: TEACH Grants are not awarded based on need and, therefore, are permitted to replace a student's EFC toward a student's postsecondary expenses. As with other forms of aid that may replace EFC, any TEACH Grant amount in excess of the EFC is considered estimated financial assistance. Calculation of a Grant for a Payment Period (Sec. Sec. 686.22 and 686.25) Statute: Section 420M(a)(1) of the HEA establishes the amount a TEACH Grant-eligible student may receive for a year, and section 420M(c)(1) of the HEA provides that awards for part-time attendance shall be reduced in proportion to a student's less-than-full-time enrollment status. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. Sec. 686.22 and 686.25 would detail how an institution would calculate a TEACH Grant payment for a payment period for an eligible student depending on the academic calendar of the eligible program, the student's enrollment status, and the amount of the student's annual award. Reasons: As is the case with the Federal Pell Grant Program, a student's award for a TEACH Grant would be based on the student's enrollment status, a status that is based on attendance over a portion of an academic year. Proposed Sec. Sec. 686.22 and 686.25 would generally correspond to the Federal Pell Grant Program regulations in 34 CFR 690.63 and 690.66, including amendments to these sections published in the Federal Register on November 1, 2007 (72 FR 62014- 62034), for calculating payments for payment periods to distribute a student's award based on the student's enrollment status. As in 34 CFR 690.63(a)(1) and (2) of the Federal Pell Grant Program regulations, Sec. 686.22(a)(1) and (2) of the proposed regulations would establish the criteria for programs eligible to use the payment calculations under proposed Sec. 686.22(b) and (c). For an undergraduate program including a post-baccalaureate program, Sec. 686.22(a)(1)(i)(C)(1) and (2)(i)(C)(1) of the proposed regulations would provide that all terms in the award year must have a minimum full-time enrollment standard of 12 credit hours. In addition, proposed Sec. 686.22(a)(1)(i)(C)(2) and (2)(i)(C)(2) would provide that, for a graduate program, all terms in the award year must have the same minimum full-time enrollment status as determined by the institution for a semester, trimester, or quarter in that program. The provision for graduate programs would assure equivalency among all terms in the award year for purposes of calculating payments for payment periods. Minimum Payment Statute: The statute does not establish a minimum TEACH Grant payment. Proposed Regulations: Section 686.22(g) of the proposed regulations would provide that the minimum payment for a payment period would be $25. Reason: Because awards must be adjusted not to exceed cost of attendance, a payment for a payment period may be reduced to a minimal amount. Setting a small minimum payment for a payment period would not adversely affect a student's eligibility for an award, and a smaller payment for a payment period would not be cost effective. Definition of an Academic Year Statute: Section 420M(a)(1) of the HEA establishes the amount a TEACH Grant-eligible student may receive for a year, and section 420M(c)(1) of the HEA provides that awards for part-time attendance shall be reduced in proportion to a student's less-than-full-time enrollment status. In addition, section 481(a)(2) of the HEA defines the term academic year. Proposed Regulations: Section 686.22(h) of the proposed regulations would require an institution to define the term academic year for purposes of calculating payments for payment periods under proposed Sec. Sec. 686.22 and 686.25. For an undergraduate TEACH Grant-eligible program, including post-baccalaureate programs, the institution would define the program's Title IV, HEA academic year in terms of credit or clock hours and weeks of instructional time in accordance with 34 CFR 668.3. For a TEACH Grant-eligible master's degree program, the institution would need to define the program's Title IV, HEA academic year in accordance with 34 CFR 668.3, i.e., in terms of weeks of instructional time, and, for purposes of determining payments for TEACH Grant awards, in terms of the minimum number of credit or clock hours a full-time student would be expected to complete in the weeks of instructional [[Page 15347]] time of the program's Title IV, HEA academic year. Reasons: Under the proposed regulations, a TEACH Grant-eligible program's Title IV, HEA academic year based on both weeks of instructional time and credit or clock hours is integral to determining the payment formula applicable to the program as well as the calculation of payments under the appropriate payment formula based on a student's enrollment status. While a Title IV, HEA academic year for an undergraduate TEACH Grant-eligible program, including a post- baccalaureate program, would be defined based on both weeks of instructional time and credit or clock hours under 34 CFR 668.3, a Title IV, HEA academic year for a graduate TEACH Grant-eligible program, such as a master's degree program, would be defined under 34 CFR 668.3 based only on weeks of instructional time. Proposed Sec. 686.22(h)(2) would, therefore, add a credit or clock hour measure to the Title IV, HEA academic year of a master's degree program for purposes of calculating a payment for a payment period under proposed Sec. Sec. 686.22 or 686.25, as applicable, to implement the provisions of these sections for a TEACH Grant-eligible master's degree program. Calculation of a Grant for a Payment Period From Two Scheduled Awards (Sec. 686.22(i)) Statute: The HEA does not address payments from two Scheduled Awards. Proposed Regulations: Under Sec. 686.22(i) of the proposed regulations, if a student is completing the remaining portion of a Scheduled Award in a payment period, the student's payment would be calculated using the annual award for his or her enrollment status for the payment period. The student's payment would be the remaining amount of the Scheduled Award being completed plus an amount from the next Scheduled Award, if available, up to the total amount of the payment for the payment period. Reason: In certain circumstances, a student may, within the same payment period, be completing his or her eligibility for the remaining balance of a Scheduled Award while also having eligibility to receive another Scheduled Award. This provision would provide guidance to institutions in calculating a student's payment for the payment period in this circumstance and would ensure that eligible students receive their awards. Calculation of a Grant for a Payment Period That Occurs in Two Award Years (Sec. 686.23) Statute: The HEA does not address a payment period that occurs in two award years. Proposed Regulations: This section would address how an institution calculates a TEACH Grant payment for an eligible student's payment period when the student is enrolled in a payment period that overlaps two award years. These proposed regulations would generally be the same as the Federal Pell Grant program regulations. As is required in the Federal Pell Grant, ACG, and National SMART Grant programs, an institution is required to assign, at its option, a "cross-over" payment period to one of the two award years. However, it must place a payment period with more than six months scheduled in an award year within that award year. Reason: A Federal Pell Grant Scheduled Award is available only for a specific award year. A student's TEACH Grant Scheduled Award would remain available without respect to award years until the student uses all of the Scheduled Award, and an eligible student would be able to receive more than one TEACH Grant in an award year. Transfer Student: Attendance at More Than One Institution During an Award Year (Sec. 686.24) Statute: The HEA does not address the issue of attendance at more than one institution during an award year. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.24 would specify how an institution calculates a payment for an eligible student who transfers from another postsecondary institution within the same award year. The proposed regulations would be generally similar to the corresponding provisions in 34 CFR 690.65 under the Federal Pell Grant program regulations with one exception. Proposed Sec. 686.24(d) would provide that a student would only receive the remaining balance of the student's last Scheduled Award if the balance would be less than the amount of the payment for the payment period calculated under proposed Sec. Sec. 686.22 or 686.25. Reason: To ensure that a student who attends more than one institution in an award year does not receive an overaward, we are providing the procedures for an institution to determine the TEACH Grant payment for a payment period for a transfer student. Determination of Eligibility for Payment (Sec. 686.31) Statute: Section 420M of the HEA provides that the Secretary shall pay a grant to each TEACH Grant-eligible student who files an application and a service agreement for attendance in a TEACH Grant- eligible program and who demonstrates TEACH Grant eligibility under section 420N of the HEA. Proposed regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.31 would provide that, similar to the Federal Pell Grant, ACG, and National SMART Grant program regulations, an institution may pay a student a TEACH Grant only after determining that the student is an eligible student, is enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible program, and has completed the payment period for which he or she has received a TEACH Grant if enrolled in a credit-hour program without terms or a clock-hour program. In addition, the proposed regulations would require an institution to ensure that the student has signed a service agreement described in proposed Sec. 686.12 and has completed relevant counseling requirements prior to paying a student. The proposed regulations would mirror similar requirements in the Federal Pell Grant, ACG, and National SMART Grant program regulations concerning determinations that a student is not maintaining satisfactory academic progress or the necessary GPA for a TEACH Grant or is not pursuing a career in teaching. In addition, similar to the ACG and National SMART Grant program regulations, the proposed regulations would allow an institution to make one disbursement for a payment period to an otherwise eligible student if the student's final high school GPA is not yet available or if the student's cumulative GPA through the prior payment period is not yet available and the institution assumes the liability for any overpayment if the student fails to meet the required GPA to receive that disbursement. Reasons: The Secretary believes that it is important to ensure that the student has completed the relevant counseling requirements and has signed the service agreement prior to receiving a TEACH Grant. In addition, as with the case of the Federal Pell Grant, ACG, and National SMART Grant programs, the proposed regulations would specify how to handle situations in which the student is not maintaining satisfactory progress or the required GPA or is not pursuing a career in teaching and allow institutions flexibility to make one disbursement for a payment period when the relevant GPA for a student is [[Page 15348]] not yet available. The proposed regulations for this section would follow the corresponding Federal Pell Grant, ACG, and National SMART Grant program regulations in 34 CFR 690.75 and 691.75. Counseling Requirements (Sec. 686.32) Statute: The HEA does not address student counseling issues related to the TEACH Grant program. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.32 would require institutions to ensure that each TEACH Grant recipient receives counseling prior to each grant disbursement as well as prior to leaving the institution. Counseling requirements are broken into three sections: Initial counseling, Subsequent counseling, and Exit counseling. Institutions would be required to provide initial counseling in person, by audiovisual presentation, or by interactive electronic means, prior to the first disbursement of a TEACH Grant. Additionally, schools would be required to ensure that an individual with expertise in Title IV, HEA programs is available to students shortly after the initial counseling session to answer questions. Initial counseling would include information about: The terms and conditions of a TEACH Grant service agreement; how to access information about low-income schools and documented high-need fields; the opportunity to request a service obligation suspension; conditions that could preclude the student from completing the service obligation attached to a TEACH Grant; conversion of a grant to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan; and the rights and responsibilities that apply to any grant recipient whose TEACH Grant converts to a loan. Initial counseling would also notify students that in order to receive credit for teaching service the field in which they teach must be a high-need field at that time and in the State where the recipient begins teaching that subject. If a student receives more than one TEACH Grant, he or she would be required to complete subsequent counseling prior to any additional grant disbursements. Similar to initial counseling, institutions would be able to provide counseling for subsequent disbursements in person, by audiovisual presentation, or by interactive electronic means and would be required to have an expert in Title IV, HEA programs available to answer questions shortly after counseling occurs. Subsequent counseling would coincide with the student's renewal of the annual service agreement. The information that would be provided by subsequent counseling would not be as comprehensive as the information required in initial counseling. Students would be reminded of: The terms and conditions of a TEACH Grant service agreement; the consequences of not completing the service obligation; and the responsibility to repay any grant amount, plus interest, that is converted to a loan. Institutions would also be required to ensure that TEACH Grant recipients receive exit counseling prior to leaving the institution. Counseling would be required to be provided in person, by audiovisual presentation, or by interactive electronic means and institutions would need to ensure that an expert in Title IV, HEA programs is available shortly after the exit counseling to answer any questions. If a student withdraws from the institution without an institution's knowledge or is no longer enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible program and fails to complete exit counseling, the institution is required to provide exit counseling within 30 days after the date that the institution learned that the student withdrew or that the student is no longer enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible program. The information provided to students during exit counseling would be similar to the information that students receive during initial and subsequent counseling. However, exit counseling would also remind students that they must teach as a highly-qualified teacher in a high- need field at a low-income school in order to fulfill the service obligation of the TEACH Grant. In addition, students would be reminded that they are required to submit written documentation to the Secretary on an annual basis showing that they are fulfilling their service obligation by teaching in a high-need field at a low-income school or that they intend to complete the service obligation within eight years of completing their TEACH Grant program. Furthermore exit counseling would provide TEACH Grant recipients with information about available repayment options for grants that convert to a loan as well as information about loan deferments, discharges, default, how to view student aid information in the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS), and how to contact the Secretary. Reasons: Sharing information with students about the TEACH Grant program and the obligations that acceptance of a TEACH Grant entails is essential. The non-Federal negotiators stressed the need to disclose as much information as possible to students in a clear and concise manner on an on-going basis. In addition to sending quarterly interest statements to students and requiring that recipients complete an annual service agreement to re-affirm their consent, the Department proposed annual in-person counseling sessions prior to grant disbursements. The non-Federal negotiators agreed that counseling students is important; however, some negotiators argued that requiring institutions to perform in-person counseling with each TEACH Grant recipient prior to each grant disbursement would not only be burdensome, but could also delay disbursements. Additionally, many non-Federal negotiators argued that there is little proof that in-person counseling is more effective than interactive electronic counseling and cited several personal accounts where students who participated in in-person, group counseling sessions did not pay attention to the presenter. In response to these concerns, the Department proposed revised language that would allow institutions to provide counseling in-person, by audiovisual presentation, or by interactive electronic means with the stipulation that institutions must ensure that an expert on Title IV, HEA programs is available shortly after the counseling session to answer any questions. The non-Federal negotiators raised another concern about the amount of counseling that the TEACH Grant program requires. Some argued that requiring counseling annually is too much and goes above and beyond what is necessary. Others noted that annual counseling is acceptable, but only if the counseling could be completed electronically. In response to these concerns, the Department clarified the proposed regulations and added language to indicate that subsequent counseling could be provided in an interactive electronic format or as an audiovisual presentation. Additionally, one negotiator recommended that the Department consider creating an online interactive counseling program that would be completed when the student completes the annual service agreement. The Department intends to create an interactive electronic counseling program that will be connected to the annual renewal of the service agreement, though this program will not be available in the first year of the TEACH Grant program. Institutions would be required to provide counseling until the Department notifies schools that an interactive online program has been included as part of the renewal of the service agreement. [[Page 15349]] The non-Federal negotiators were also concerned about the information that would be required in each counseling session. Several non-Federal negotiators asked the Department to add a requirement that institutions convey specific information to students to notify them of the various conditions that could preclude them from completing the service obligation. Some non-Federal negotiators also asked the Department to require institutions to provide information to students about how to find low-income schools and high-need fields in initial counseling as well as in exit counseling. In addition, non-Federal negotiators asked the Department to clarify that if a student chooses to study a field that is removed from the high-need field list before the grant recipient begins teaching, that subject area is no longer a high-need field and thus the recipient may not be able to use this teaching in this field to fulfill the service obligation. The Department added specific language to the initial and exit counseling sections to address these concerns and reminded the non-Federal negotiators that institutions will be able to direct students to the Nationwide List that is published annually and available on the Department's Web site. Also, Sec. 686.32(b) of the proposed regulations would delineate the particular requirements for subsequent counseling sessions, which are less comprehensive than the initial and exit counseling session. The counseling requirement is an institutional responsibility. As such, the Department encourages institutions to establish collaborative working relationships between their financial aid office and the entity that would be most knowledgeable about teaching requirements for TEACH Grant recipients. For instance, several non-Federal negotiators recommended that an institution's college of education or teacher preparation program work closely with the financial aid office to ensure that students receive the best information available about financial aid as well as about academic requirements, teaching opportunities, and teacher certification. Frequency of Payment (Sec. 686.33) Statute: The HEA does not address this issue. Proposed regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.33 would provide that, similar to the Federal Pell Grant, ACG, and National SMART Grant program regulations, an institution may pay a student a TEACH Grant at such times and in such installments that best meet the student's needs. In addition, under this proposed section, the institution could pay the student in a lump sum for all prior payment periods for which the student was eligible and would have to determine the amount of the payment based on the student's enrollment status according to the work completed by the student for the payment period. To be eligible to receive a lump sum payment for prior payment periods, the student would have had to meet the eligibility criteria in proposed Sec. 686.11 for the prior payment period with the exception that the student would not have needed to sign the service agreement during that payment period. However, the student would need to sign a service agreement prior to receiving a disbursement as described in proposed Sec. 686.31. Reason: As is the case with the Federal Pell Grant, ACG, and National SMART Grant programs, an institution should have the flexibility to determine the timing and the amounts of any installments of a student's TEACH Grant to best meet the needs of the student. Also, consistent with the Federal Pell Grant, ACG, and National SMART Grant programs, the institution should have the discretion to pay a student in a lump sum for all prior payment periods for which the student was eligible based on the coursework the student completed for the payment period. Institutional Reporting Requirements (Sec. 686.37) Statute: The HEA does not address the issue of institutional reporting requirements in the TEACH Grant program. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.37 would require institutions to provide the Secretary with information pertaining to a student's eligibility to receive a TEACH Grant, the student's TEACH grant amounts, and the actual disbursement dates and amounts of the grants. This proposed section would also establish a submission timeline for institutions. Reasons: The proposed regulations would require institutions to submit eligibility and disbursement data to the Secretary because the Department intends to contact TEACH Grant recipients on a quarterly basis by sending interest statements and to collect annual service agreements. To make this process work, the Department would need eligibility and disbursement information. Documenting the Service Obligation (Sec. 686.40) Statute: Section 420N(b)(1)(D) of the HEA requires that a TEACH Grant recipient must, upon completion of each of the four required elementary or secondary academic years of teaching service, provide evidence of that teaching service in the form of a certification by the chief administrative officer of the school in which the grant recipient is teaching. Proposed Regulations: Proposed regulations in Sec. 686.40(a) would provide that a TEACH Grant recipient must confirm to the Secretary in writing that he or she has either begun employment as a full-time teacher in accordance with the terms and conditions of the service agreement, or that he or she is not yet employed as a full-time teacher, but intends to meet the terms and conditions of the service agreement. Proposed regulations in Sec. 686.40(b) would require that, if a grant recipient has begun full-time teaching service in accordance with the service agreement, he or she must provide documentation of that service to the Secretary on an approved form certified by the chief administrative officer of the school in which the grant recipient is teaching. The documentation required under this proposed section would need to show that the grant recipient is teaching in a high-need field in the majority of classes taught during each elementary or secondary academic year in a low-income school as a highly-qualified teacher. In addition to addressing documentation requirements for creditable service performed by the grant recipient, proposed Sec. 686.40(b) would provide that if the school at which the grant recipient is employed meets the requirements of a low-income school in the first year of the grant recipient's four academic years of teaching but fails to meet those requirements in subsequent years, the subsequent years of teaching would count toward fulfillment of the service agreement. Similarly, proposed Sec. 686.40(c)(2) would provide that if a grant recipient begins teaching in a high-need field listed in the Nationwide List and in subsequent years the high-need field is no longer designated as such, the subsequent years of teaching in that field would count toward the service agreement. Proposed Sec. 686.40(e) would provide that if a grant recipient is able to complete only one-half of an elementary or secondary academic year because of a condition covered under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) for a qualifying serious health condition or exigency, or because of a call to military service, either as a reserve of the Armed Forces or a member of the National Guard, that half year is counted as a complete year for purposes of completing the service agreement as [[Page 15350]] long as the grant recipient's school employer considers the grant recipient to have fulfilled his or her contract requirements. Lastly, proposed Sec. 686.40(f) would provide that a grant recipient may teach in more than one low-income school during an elementary or secondary academic year as long as the combined teaching service is the equivalent of full-time teaching. Reasons: The purpose of proposed Sec. 686.40 would be to implement the statutory requirements regarding the evidence a grant recipient must submit to show compliance with the terms of his or her service agreement. Proposed Sec. 686.40(b), (c)(2), (e), and (f) would be consistent with regulations in the Title IV, HEA loan programs related to teacher loan forgiveness so that TEACH Grant recipients who may be performing teaching service to meet both their service agreement and the requirements to receive loan forgiveness have only one set of requirements. Several of the non-Federal negotiators voiced concern that the Nationwide List that TEACH Grant recipients will use to document their teaching service may not reflect high-need field shortages at the local level. One of the non-Federal negotiators suggested that the Department specify in proposed Sec. 686.40(c)(ii) a process whereby States would be required to consult with LEAs so that high-need field shortages at the local level are reflected. The Department declined to regulate in this area because the process currently in place under 34 CFR 682.210(q) provides for the designation of high-need fields by an LEA and because mandating such a process would be a Federal intrusion on an inherently State function. During the negotiations, the Department suggested specifying in proposed Sec. 686.40(e)(1) the conditions under which a grant recipient may count an academic year of teaching service if that year is interrupted by a condition that is covered under the FMLA. The non- Federal negotiators agreed. For that reason, proposed Sec. 686.40(e)(1) would list the FMLA conditions as follows: The birth and subsequent care of a son or daughter. The adoption of a child or provision of foster care by a grant recipient. Caring for a spouse, child or parent of the grant recipient who has a serious health condition. A serious health condition that renders the grant recipient unable to meet the requirements of the service agreement. The Department became aware after negotiations concluded that the U.S. Department of Labor had developed new proposed regulations for the FMLA that are currently out for public comment. To ensure that the TEACH Grant regulations reflect all of the conditions covered by the FLMA, we will consult with the Department of Labor when we develop final regulations. Periods of Suspension (Sec. 686.41) Statute: The statute does not address periods of suspension of the eight-year period for completion of the TEACH Grant service obligation. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.41 would provide that a TEACH Grant recipient who has completed or otherwise ceased enrollment in a TEACH Grant-eligible program may request a suspension of the eight-year time period for completion of his or her service obligation. Proposed Sec. 686.41(a)(1)(i) and (ii) would require that a suspension be based on enrollment in a TEACH Grant-eligible program of study or a State-approved teacher certification program, or a condition under the FMLA, respectively. Proposed Sec. 686.41(a)(2)(i) would require that suspensions granted under these two conditions could not exceed a combined total of three years. Proposed Sec. 686.41(a)(1)(iii) would allow a suspension to be based on a call to active duty status for members of the Armed Forces reserve or the National Guard. Proposed Sec. 686.41(a)(2) would provide that suspensions granted because of a military call-up would be granted in one-year increments and would end upon the completion of the grant recipient's military service. Proposed Sec. 686.41(b) would require a grant recipient to request a suspension on an approved form within six months after completing or terminating enrollment in a TEACH Grant-eligible program or within six months after the date he or she stops teaching. Lastly, proposed Sec. 686.41(c) would require grant recipients to provide the Secretary with documentation supporting the suspension. Reasons: Although the HEA does not explicitly provide for a suspension of the eight-year period for completion of a TEACH Grant service obligation, the Secretary is proposing regulations in Sec. 686.41 that would provide TEACH Grant recipients with some flexibility in limited circumstances with respect to the eight-year period for completion. These limited circumstances would include enrollment in a program of study for which the recipient would be eligible for a TEACH Grant or enrollment in a program of study to obtain a certificate or license to begin teaching. This flexibility would prevent TEACH Grant recipients who, because of State requirements, must complete an undergraduate degree and subsequently obtain the credential that actually allows them to begin teaching, from being penalized with regard to completion of their first service obligation. These limited circumstances also would include conditions covered under the FMLA and a call to military service as part of the Armed Forces reserve or the National Guard, because the Secretary believes that TEACH Grant recipients should not be placed at a disadvantage in completing their service obligations as a result of a significant family illness or situation or while defending their country in the event of a call to active service in connection with a war, military operation, or a national emergency. The non-Federal negotiators believed that the proposed regulations in Sec. 686.41 would not adequately address situations that could affect a TEACH Grant recipient's ability to meet the terms of his or her service obligation within eight years after completing a TEACH Grant-eligible program. Some non-Federal negotiators suggested that the Secretary should allow a TEACH Grant recipient to suspend his or her service obligation in the event of extenuating circumstances that preclude the TEACH Grant recipient from completing his or her service obligation in the required eight-year timeframe. The Secretary declined to expand the circumstances for suspension. The Secretary believes such an expansion would contradict the intent of the TEACH Grant program by delaying the entry of highly-qualified teachers into high-need fields in low-income schools where they are badly needed. The negotiating committee agreed to the language in proposed Sec. 686.41. As noted elsewhere in this preamble, the portion of the language related to the conditions covered by the FMLA will need to be consistent with the Department of Labor regulations. While these regulations reflect FMLA regulations with regard to the conditions under which a TEACH Grant recipient may request a suspension, we would not require a TEACH Grant recipient to go through the certification process specified in the FMLA regulations. Discharge of Service Agreement (Sec. 686.42) Statute: The statute does not address the discharge of a service obligation if a TEACH Grant recipient dies or becomes totally and permanently disabled. [[Page 15351]] Proposed Regulations: In the case of a TEACH Grant recipient who dies, proposed Sec. 686.42(a) would require the discharge of the grant recipient's service obligation upon receipt of an original or certified copy of the TEACH Grant recipient's death certificate, an accurate and complete photocopy of the original or certified copy of the grant recipient's death certificate, or, on a case-by-case basis, reliable information acceptable to the Secretary. In the case of a TEACH Grant recipient who becomes totally and permanently disabled as that term is defined in 34 CFR 682.200(b), proposed Sec. 686.42(b) would provide for a discharge of the service obligation if the TEACH Grant recipient applies for and satisfies the same eligibility requirements for a total and permanent disability discharge of a Direct Loan in 34 CFR 685.213. Proposed Sec. 686.42(b)(2) would provide that the eight-year time period in which the grant recipient must complete the service obligation remain in effect during the conditional discharge period described in 34 CFR 685.213(c)(2) unless the grant recipient is eligible for a suspension based on the conditions covered by the FMLA. Proposed Sec. 686.42(b)(3) would provide that interest continues to accrue on each TEACH Grant disbursement received unless and until the grant recipient's service agreement is discharged by the Secretary. Lastly, proposed Sec. 686.42(b)(4) and (5) would provide that if the grant recipient meets the eligibility requirements throughout the three-year conditional discharge period, the service obligation is discharged; if not, the grant recipient is once again subject to the terms of the service agreement. Reasons: The Secretary believes that it would be appropriate to provide a discharge of a TEACH Grant recipient's service obligation in cases when the grant recipient cannot comply with his or her service agreement because of death or total and permanent disability. Although grant aid does not have to be repaid, the service agreement signed by a TEACH Grant recipient is a binding, legal document requiring the repayment of each TEACH Grant, along with interest accrued from the date of disbursement, as a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan if the service obligation is not met. A discharge of the service obligation for death and total and permanent disability relieves the grant recipient of a potential repayment obligation and is also consistent with the treatment of Title IV, HEA loans. Proposed Sec. 686.42(b) would adopt the definition of totally and permanently disabled already used in the Federal Direct Loan program regulations. The definition of totally and permanently disabled (in 34 CFR 682.200(b)) is "the condition of an individual who is unable to work and earn money because of an injury or illness that is expected to continue indefinitely or result in death." A TEACH Grant recipient who meets this definition of totally and permanently disabled cannot comply with the service agreement because he or she cannot work and earn money. The Department considered proposing regulations that would have required a TEACH Grant recipient who became totally and permanently disabled to request a conversion of his or her TEACH Grants to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan so that the existing process under which the Secretary grants a total and permanent disability discharge in the Direct Loan program would be available to the TEACH Grant recipient. However, non-Federal negotiators persuaded the Department to adopt a total and permanent disability discharge process that would preserve the grant status of the TEACH Grant rather than mandate the conversion of the TEACH Grant to a loan. The non-Federal negotiators felt that a TEACH Grant recipient should have the opportunity to fulfill his or her service obligation, if time remained in the eight- year period, if the TEACH Grant recipient does not receive a final total and permanent disability discharge. The non-Federal negotiators also noted that if the eight-year time period elapsed while the grant recipient was in a conditional discharge status, the TEACH Grant would convert to a loan anyway. Obligation To Repay the Grant (Sec. 686.43) Statute: Section 420N(c) of the HEA provides that if a TEACH Grant recipient fails or refuses to comply with the service obligation, the sum of the amounts of any TEACH Grants received by the recipient shall, upon a determination of such failure or refusal in such service obligation, be treated as a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan under part D of Title IV of the HEA, and shall be subject to repayment, together with interest thereon accruing from the date of the grant award. Proposed Regulations: Proposed Sec. 686.43 would require that TEACH Grant amounts be converted into a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan, with interest accruing from the date of each grant disbursement if-- The grant recipient, regardless of enrollment status, requests the conversion for any reason; Within 120 days of ceasing enrollment in the institution prior to completing the TEACH Grant-eligible program, the grant recipient has failed to notify the Secretary in accordance with proposed Sec. 686.40(a); Within one year of ceasing enrollment in the institution prior to completing a TEACH Grant-eligible program, the grant recipient has not been determined eligible for a suspension of the eight-year completion period, has not re-enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible program, or has not begun creditable teaching service to meet his or her service agreement; The grant recipient completes the course of study for which a TEACH Grant was received and does not actively confirm to the Secretary, at least annually, his or her intention to satisfy the service agreement; or The grant recipient completed a TEACH Grant-eligible program but failed to begin or maintain teaching service in accordance with the Service Agreement within the timeframe that would allow that individual to complete the service obligation within the eight-year completion period. Under proposed Sec. 686.43(b), a TEACH Grant that converts to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan would not be counted against the grant recipient's annual or aggregate Stafford Loan limits. Under proposed Sec. 686.43(c), a grant recipient whose TEACH Grant has been converted to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan would enter repayment immediately, would be eligible for all of the benefits of the Direct Loan Program, and would not be eligible for any grace period. Finally, proposed Sec. 686.43(d) would provide that once a TEACH Grant is converted to a loan, it cannot be reconverted to a grant. Reasons: The purpose of proposed Sec. 686.43 would be to implement the statutory directive that a TEACH Grant converts to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan if the grant recipient fails or refuses to carry out the terms of his or her service agreement. Because the conversion of a TEACH Grant to a loan has the potential to subject a grant recipient to a heavy debt burden, the Secretary beli