Office of Postsecondary Education - U.S. Department of Education

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations66905WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES2applicants who are incarcerated at thetime verification would occur andapplicants who are immigrants whorecently arrived in the United Statesshould not be subject to verification.One commenter noted that verificationin these cases would require institutionsto spend a significant amount of timeexplaining the Federal requirements tothese applicants when their eligibilityfor aid may not be affected by the datagathered to complete verification.Another commenter stated that adependent applicant whose parents aredeceased or are physically incapacitatedshould also be excluded fromverification.Discussion: We do not agree with thecommenters. Applicants who areincarcerated, recent immigrants to theUnited States, or whose parents arephysically incapacitated, should be ableto provide the documentation requiredto complete verification by providingtheir institution with the documentationthat was used to complete the FAFSA.An applicant whose parents aredeceased would be independent andtherefore there would be no verificationof parental information on anindependent student’s FAFSA.Changes: None.Comment: Several commentersexpressed concern that the new processfor verifying different FAFSA itemswould cause difficulties because, afterone instance of verification, therepotentially would be other items thatthe applicant would need to verifyduring subsequent transactions (a‘‘verification loop’’). One commentersuggested that if the Department usesthe targeted approach for verification, itshould limit verification selection toone time per applicant and accept asubsequent correction for that targeteditem as closure of the verificationprocess for that application. Onecommenter noted that repeatedverification does not currently occurbecause, under the current regulations,applicants are required to verify allitems the first time. One commenterexpressed concern that multipleverifications may occur for one studentif the institution submits corrections toCPS and the student also initiateschanges to the ISIR data. Thecommenter recommended includingsome protections for institutions thatsubmit corrections to ISIR data. Onecommenter asked for guidance on whatan institution is required to do when anapplicant is selected for verification,completes it, is then selected forverification again but fails to completethe second verification process.Discussion: As noted earlier, theDepartment has delayedimplementation of the changes tosubpart E of part 668, including§§ 668.54 and 668.56, which provide forthe targeted approach to verification,until the 2012–13 award year.Therefore, for the 2011–12 award year,institutions will continue to verify, forall FAFSAs selected for verification bythe Secretary, the five data items listedin current § 668.56. As we develop theselection criteria for determining whichFAFSA information must be verified foran individual applicant (i.e., selectioncriteria for determining which FAFSAinformation is prone to error), we willbuild into the system procedures thatlimit the possibility of any applicantbeing subject to additional FAFSA itemsneeding verification after the firstselection has been made. However if ouranalysis shows that, based onsubmissions of corrections, additionalFAFSA information should be verified,perhaps because it is inconsistent withthe ‘‘corrected information,’’ anapplicant may have to verify thoseadditional items.In the NPRM, we inadvertentlyomitted § 668.54(a)(4) from theverification regulations. Under current§ 668.54(a)(4), if an applicant is selectedfor verification by the Secretary, theinstitution must require the applicant toverify the information as specified in§ 668.56 on each additional applicationthe applicant submits for the award yearexcept for information already verifiedfor the applicable award year. We arerestoring § 668.54(a)(4) to provide that ifan applicant is selected by the Secretaryto verify his or her FAFSA information,the institution must require theapplicant to verify the information inaccordance with § 668.56 if theapplicant is selected for a subsequentverification of FAFSA information,except that applicant is not required toprovide documentation for that FAFSAinformation previously verified to theextent that the FAFSA informationpreviously verified remains unchanged.Under current regulations, anapplicant who has completedverification once, whose FAFSAinformation is selected a second time forverification, is only required to verifyFAFSA information not verifiedpreviously. When the revised§ 668.54(a)(4) becomes effective, such anapplicant would be required tocomplete the second verificationprocess if the FAFSA informationselected has changed for that awardyear. If the applicant fails to do so, heor she may forfeit eligibility for title IVaid in accordance with § 668.60(b).Changes: We have revised § 668.54 byreinstating current § 668.54(a)(4) toprovide that if an applicant is selectedVerDate Mar2010 14:10 Oct 28, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\29OCR2.SGM 29OCR2by the Secretary to verify his or herFAFSA information under§ 668.54(a)(1), the institution mustrequire the applicant to verify theinformation as specified in § 668.56 ifthe applicant is selected for asubsequent verification of FAFSAinformation, except that applicant is notrequired to provide documentation forthe FAFSA information previouslyverified to the extent that the FAFSAinformation previously verified remainsunchanged.Comment: Some commenterssuggested that the proposed verificationrequirements in subpart E of part 668would increase barriers for the needieststudents to apply for financial aid topursue higher education.Discussion: We do not agree. Whenthis subpart is fully implemented in the2012–13 award year, the verificationprocess is expected to be more efficientand effective for both students andinstitutions. Thus, we do not expect thatthese new requirements will add aburden or increase barriers for students,including those from low-incomebackgrounds. We have not beenpresented with any evidence to supportthat these requirements will increasebarriers for the neediest students toapply for financial aid to pursue highereducation.Changes: None.Updating Information (§ 668.55)Comment: While a few commenterssupported the requirement in§ 668.55(a)(1)(ii), which may result inmaking dependency status updates inmid-year, many stressed the difficultiesthat would arise as a result of thisrequirement. A primary concernexpressed was that this requirementwould result in a substantial increase inburden for institutions, particularlybecause a student’s financial aidpackage is affected by the student’sdependency status. One commenterclaimed that to comply with thisrequirement, institutions would need tohire extra staff, which would not bepossible in the current economy. Inaddition, some commenters noted thatthere would be undesirableconsequences for the student: One whomarries and becomes independent couldlose eligibility for the Pell Grantsalready awarded and received becausethe spouse’s financial data would betaken into account. Others stated thatstudents might get married to increasetheir Pell eligibility or that divorce,rather than marriage, would decreasePell eligibility; as one institution noted,many of its dependent students becomeeligible for more aid after they marryand become independent. Some