An initial stage in the negotiated rulemaking process is the public hearing in which all interested stakeholders present topics and comments for the Department to include in the negotiated rulemaking sessions.

On July 24, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education announced its intention to establish two negotiated rulemaking committees to prepare proposed regulations for federal student loan programs and institutional and programmatic accountability, the Pell Grant Program and other changes to the Title IV Higher Education Act (HEA) programs. Regulatory changes for federal student loan programs will be addressed by the Reimagining and Improving Student Education (RISE) Committee and changes for institutional accountability will be addressed by the Accountability in Higher Education and Access through Demand-driven Workforce Pell (AHEAD) Committee. The rulemaking sessions will provide for the implementation of the higher education provisions included in Pub. L. 119-21 of the recently passed federal tax and budget legislation.

In the negotiated rulemaking process outlined below, there are various opportunities for interested parties to participate and influence the outcome of each set of proposed regulations. Consistent involvement throughout this process provides a number of benefits discussed in further detail below, even if specific language/concepts are not incorporated into the final regulations.

Upcoming Dates to Monitor

Public Hearing 

The Department will hold an initial public hearing virtually on August 7, 2025.

Negotiated Rulemaking Sessions 

The RISE Committee will hold sessions from September 29 to October 3, 2025, and November 3 to 7, 2025.

The AHEAD Committee will hold sessions from December 8 to 12, 2025, and January 5 to 9, 2026.

Timeline of Negotiated Rulemaking Process

1. Publication of Federal Register notice to establish a negotiated rulemaking committee.
2. Announcement that the Department will conduct public hearing to discuss potential topics.
3. Interested parties will submit public comments for public hearing.*
4. Interested parties will submit nominees for rulemaking negotiators.*
5. Department selects negotiators to participate in rulemaking committees.
6. Publication of Federal Register notice stating list of topics for rulemaking committee.
7. Publication of session materials prior to rulemaking session.
8. Rulemaking sessions conducted over specified period of time.
9. Review by Office of Management and Budget.*
10. Publication of notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
11. Publication of Federal Register notice soliciting public comments on proposed regulations.*
12. Review by Office of Management and Budget.*
13. Publication of final rule.

*We provide analysis of certain events below where public participation is permitted and identify the importance for interested parties to participate in such events.

Public Hearing

An initial stage in the negotiated rulemaking process is the public hearing in which all interested stakeholders present topics and comments for the Department to include in the negotiated rulemaking sessions. Stakeholders have the option to testify at the hearing (if proper procedure is followed) and may additionally submit written comments providing advice and recommendations to the Department with respect to the rulemaking sessions.

For the rulemaking sessions for the RISE and AHEAD Committees, the public hearing will be held on August 7, 2025, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., Eastern. The Department will accept written comments providing advice and recommendations on the implementation of the changes to the Title IV HEA programs included in Pub. L. 119-21 through August 25, 2025. This extended comment period permits the public to file comments regarding any of the testimony provided on August 7, even if you did not testify.

Even if parties have not complied with the deadline to testify at the hearing, monitoring the hearing and submitting written comments to the Department is advisable if the negotiation topics may impact your institution. Counsel may provide additional insight into the importance of submitting written comments for various topics that are not included in the original Federal Register notice.

Nominations for Committee Members

Another early stage in the negotiated rulemaking process is the selection of committee negotiators. For each rulemaking committee, potential committee members are nominated by the public and later selected by the Department. A maximum of 25 representatives may serve on the committee. The Federal Register notice provides a list of constituency groups which will be represented on the committee and provides instruction for the submission of nominations.

All interested parties should consider submitting or supporting a nomination to the Department. The negotiators represent the interests of their constituency groups and will help advise the Department on the impact that certain language may have on their constituencies. As such, it is important to nominate negotiators that are knowledgeable and experienced in the designated field and will adequately serve the interests of their interest groups. The nomination itself is included in the public record and may be cited in future public comments and additional communications to the Department as evidence of the involvement of a specific interest group throughout the rulemaking process. Experienced counsel may provide valuable insight into the negotiator selection process and should be consulted to assist in the preparation of any nominations.

For the upcoming rulemaking sessions, interested parties should sent nominations via email to nominationsfederalstudentloans@ed.gov by August 25, 2025, and should identify the constituency group and appropriate committee for the negotiator.

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Meetings

Following the conclusion of the rulemaking sessions, the Department will submit its proposed rule to OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for approval. OMB may review the proposed rule for up to 90 days, with a possibility to extend the review period to 120 days. OIRA holds a significant role in the rulemaking process, provided by Executive Order 12866. The agency is tasked with conducting a cost-benefit analysis of the proposed rule and provides additional transparency into the rulemaking process. Additionally, it serves as an additional mechanism to ensure that the proposed rule is consistent with the current administration’s policies.

During this review of the proposed rule, the public has the option to request a meeting with OIRA. This provides interested parties with the opportunity to discuss issues with the proposed rule. Additionally, it provides an opportunity to discuss the proposed rule with a different agency that may have a different viewpoint or different priorities in its analysis. Interested parties are able to sign up for available timeslots on regulations.gov, which provides a public list of all meetings/attendees. Experienced counsel may provide valuable insight into the operations of this process (such as the format of the meeting and who should participate) and should be consulted in the drafting talking points and preparing for the meeting.

Submitting Public Comments

The public comment period is significant stage of the rulemaking process for its ability to build a record supportive or critical of the agencies under review and is the foundation for any future administrative or legal appeal of recognition decisions. All interested parties have the opportunity to submit public comments. The NPRM will provide a deadline for parties to submit public comments.

Under the Administrative Procedure Act, a federal agency is required to “consider all relevant factors raised by the public comments and provide a response to significant points within.” Chamber of Com. of U.S. v. SEC, 85 F.4th 760, 774 (5th Cir. 2023). Additionally, the agency must consider these comments and provide a "concise general statement of [its] basis and purpose" in the final rule. 

For the reasons stated above, it is important that all parties submit public comments and require the agency to respond to each comment substantively. Comments should address any legal and policy deficiencies in the proposal, including describing unintended consequences or onerous operational impacts. It is important to note that if the proposed rule is challenged in court, the administrative record (such as concerns raised in the public comment) will form the primary basis for judicial review. Experienced counsel will be able to provide advice on effective communications to the Department on this matter and, additionally, highlight the importance of the public comment period for the proposed topics.

Final OMB Meetings

As one of the final stages of the proceedings, the Department will submit its final rule to OMB’s OIRA for approval. The public will again have the option to request a meeting with OIRA. Following the review period, the Department will publish its final rule in the Federal Register.

This is the last opportunity for the public to influence the rulemaking process. As such, it is important for any interested parties to participate and solidify its attempt to influence the proposed rule. As stated above, experienced counsel may provide valuable insight into the operations of this process (such as the format of the meeting and who should participate) and should be consulted in the preparation of the meeting.

About Duane Morris

The Duane Morris Higher Education Group has experience guiding associations, institutions and other interested parties in identifying key issues at stake in rulemaking proceedings, preparing substantive input for consideration by negotiating committees, framing and drafting public comments and holding constructive meetings with government officials during the rulemaking process.

For More Information

If you have any questions about this Alert, please contact any of the attorneys in our Higher Education Group or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.

Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm's full disclaimer.