Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations: Resource Limits and Exclusions, and Extended Certification Periods, 4469-4474 [2010-1708]
Download as PDF
4469
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 75, No. 18
Thursday, January 28, 2010
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
disabled to be certified for up to 24
months.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective March 1, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura Castro, Chief, Policy Branch, Food
Distribution Division, Food and
Nutrition Service, 3101 Park Center
Drive, Room 506, Alexandria, Virginia
22302, or by telephone (703) 305–2662.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Food and Nutrition Service
I. Procedural Matters
II. Background and Discussion of the Final
Rule
7 CFR Part 253
I. Procedural Matters
[FNS–2007–0042]
A. Executive Order 12866
RIN 0584–AD12
This rule has been determined to be
significant, and was reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under Executive Order 12866.
Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations: Resource Limits and
Exclusions, and Extended Certification
Periods
1. Need for Action
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Food and Nutrition
Service (FNS) is amending the
regulations for the Food Distribution
Program on Indian Reservations
(FDPIR). The changes will improve
program service, ensure consistency
between FDPIR and the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
(formerly the Food Stamp Program), and
respond to concerns expressed by the
National Association of Food
Distribution Programs on Indian
Reservations (NAFDPIR) that the current
FDPIR resource limits are insufficient
for the target populations and serve as
a barrier to participation. The rule will
increase the maximum level of
allowable resources to the same level
permitted under SNAP (including the
establishment of a resource limit of
$3,000 for FDPIR households with a
disabled member in accordance with
Section 4107 of the Farm Security and
Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Pub. L.
107–171), and annual adjustments for
inflation in accordance with Section
4104 of the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110–246),
allow a resource exclusion for the first
$1,500 of the equity value of one prepaid funeral arrangement per household
member, and allow households in
which all members are elderly and/or
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:06 Jan 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
B. Regulatory Impact Analysis
This action is needed to ensure that
regulations pertaining to certification
period assignments for elderly and/or
disabled households and resource
standards are consistent between FDPIR
and SNAP and to reflect provisions
contained in the Farm Security and
Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Pub. L.
107–171), which established a resource
limit of $3,000 for SNAP households
with a disabled member, and in Section
4104 of the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110–246),
which established an annual inflation
adjustment to the SNAP resource limits
starting in fiscal year (FY) 2009.
2. Benefits
This rule amends FDPIR regulations
by aligning several provisions with their
counterparts in the SNAP. These
regulatory changes are designed to help
ensure that FDPIR benefits are provided
to low-income households living on or
near Indian reservations that are in need
of nutrition assistance. Because FDPIR
regulations regarding resource limits
and exclusions are altered by this rule,
participation could potentially increase,
thus expanding access to those eligible
for the program and increasing
nutritional benefits to the targeted
population.
FNS has projected the impact of each
change on FDPIR participation.
However, we are unable to determine
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the total number of individuals that
might be added as a result of this rule.
An individual might benefit from more
than one provision and the effect of the
overlap could not be determined.
3. Cost
This action is not expected to
significantly increase costs of State and
local agencies, or their commercial
contractors, in using donated foods. The
combined impact of the changes in this
rulemaking is projected to increase
program costs by $68,000 in FY 2010
and $852,000 over a five-year period
(FY 2010–2014). These increased costs
are attributable to potential increases in
participation.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed with
regard to the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5
U.S.C. 601–612). The Under Secretary
for Food, Nutrition and Consumer
Services has certified that this action
will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
While program participants and Indian
Tribal Organizations (ITOs) and State
agencies that administer the FDPIR and
the Food Distribution Program for
Indian Households in Oklahoma
(FDPIHO) will be affected by this
rulemaking, the economic effect will not
be significant.
D. Public Law 104–4
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104–4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and Tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
the Department generally must prepare
a written statement, including a cost/
benefit analysis, for proposed and final
rules with Federal mandates that may
result in expenditures to State, local, or
Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
to the private sector, of $100 million or
more in any one year. When such a
statement is needed for a rule, section
205 of the UMRA generally requires the
Department to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the least costly,
more cost-effective or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule.
This rule contains no Federal
mandates (under the regulatory
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
4470
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) that
impose on State, local or Tribal
governments or the private sector of
$100 million or more in any one year.
This rule is, therefore, not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of
the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 12372
The program addressed in this action
is listed in the Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance under No. 10.567.
For the reasons set forth in the final rule
in 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V and
related Notice published at 48 FR
29114, June 24, 1983, the donation of
foods in such programs is included in
the scope of Executive Order 12372,
which requires intergovernmental
consultation with State and local
officials.
F. Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 requires
Federal agencies to consider the impact
of their regulatory actions on State and
local governments. Where such actions
have federalism implications, agencies
are directed to provide a statement for
inclusion in the preamble to the
regulations describing the agency’s
considerations in terms of the three
categories called for under section
(6)(b)(2)(B) of Executive Order 13132.
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
1. Prior Consultation With Tribal/State
Officials
The programs affected by the
regulatory provisions in this rule are all
Tribal or State-administered, federally
funded programs. FNS’ national
headquarters and regional offices have
formal and informal discussions with
State officials on an ongoing basis
regarding program issues relating to the
distribution of donated foods. FNS
meets annually with NAFDPIR, a
national group of State agencies, to
discuss issues relating to food
distribution.
2. Nature of Concerns and the Need To
Issue This Rule
This rule will provide consistency
between FDPIR and SNAP in regard to
certification period assignments for
elderly and/or disabled households and
resource standards. The rule was
prompted, in part, by a resolution
passed by NAFDPIR in FY 2000.
NAFDPIR expressed concern that the
current FDPIR resource limit was
insufficient for the target population
and served as a barrier to participation.
The rule was also prompted, in part, by
a provision contained in the Farm
Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002 (Pub. L. 107–171), enacted on May
13, 2002. Section 4107 of Public Law
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:06 Jan 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
107–171 established a SNAP resource
limit of $3,000 for households with a
disabled member. Also, Section 4104 of
the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act
of 2008 (Pub. L. 110–246), enacted on
May 22, 2008, established an annual
inflation factor adjustment to the SNAP
resource limits. That provision was
effective October 1, 2008. The other
regulatory provisions finalized in this
rule are also consistent with SNAP
provisions.
3. Extent to Which the Department
Meets Those Concerns
The Department has considered the
impact of the final rule on State
agencies. The Department does not
expect the provisions of this rule to
conflict with any State or local law,
regulations or policies. The overall
effect of this rule is to ensure that lowincome households living on or near
Indian reservations receive nutrition
assistance. This rule will ensure
consistency between FDPIR and SNAP
in regard to certification period
assignments for elderly and/or disabled
households and resource standards.
G. Executive Order 12988
This final rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. Although the provisions
of this rule are not expected to conflict
with any State or local law, regulations,
or policies, the rule is intended to have
preemptive effect with respect to any
State or local laws, regulations or
policies that conflict with its provisions
or that would otherwise impede its full
implementation. This rule is not
intended to have retroactive effect. Prior
to any judicial challenge to the
provisions of this rule or the application
of its provisions all applicable
administrative procedures must be
exhausted.
H. Civil Rights Impact Analysis
The Office of Civil Rights (OCR) has
reviewed this rule in accordance with
Departmental Regulation 4300–4, ‘‘Civil
Rights Impact Analysis’’, to identify and
address any major civil rights impact
the rule might have on protected
classes. Due to the unavailability of
data, OCR cannot assess
disproportionate impact on women,
minorities, and persons with
disabilities. OCR believes the intent of
this rule is not to limit or reduce the
ability of participants to receive the
benefits of donated foods in the FDPIR,
nor is its intent to reduce or eliminate
equal access to participation in FDPIR.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
I. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. Chapter 35; see 5 CFR part
1320) requires that OMB approve all
collections of information by a Federal
agency from the public before they can
be implemented. Respondents are not
required to respond to any collection of
information unless it displays a current
valid OMB control number. Proposed
information collection burden related to
the provisions in this final rule and
burden changes related to the
implementation of a new Web-Based
Supply Chain Management System
(WBSCM) are currently at OMB for
review under OMB No. 0584–0293,
expiration date November 30, 2009.
These information collection
requirements will not become effective
until approved by OMB. Once they have
been approved, FNS will publish a
separate action in the Federal Register
announcing OMB’s approval.
This rule will not change the current
recordkeeping burden for ITOs and
State agencies under OMB No. 0584–
0293, but it will impact the reporting
burden due to an expected change in
number of households participating in
FDPIR as a result of this rule.
Households complete an application
process to participate in the program
and are recertified at intervals
determined by the State agency or ITO.
The current estimated annual reporting
burden for the certification or
recertification of households to
participate in FDPIR is 2,329.05. The
provisions of this rule are expected to
increase that burden to approximately
2,379.66, which is an increase of 50.61
burden hours.
The approved and proposed
information collection estimates for
OMB No. 0584–0293 are as follows:
Current estimated total annual
responses: 1,160,746.
Proposed estimated total annual
responses: 1,655,720.
Difference due to program changes, as
reflected in this final rule: 99.
Difference due to WBSCM
implementation: 494,875.
Current estimated annual
recordkeeping and reporting burden:
1,073,701.
Proposed estimated annual
recordkeeping and reporting burden:
1,079,172.
Difference due to program changes, as
reflected in this final rule: 51.
Difference due to WBSCM
implementation: 5,420.
J. E-Government Act Compliance
The Department is committed to
complying with the E-Government Act
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
to promote the use of the Internet and
other information technologies to
provide increased opportunities for
citizen access to Government
information and services, and for other
purposes.
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
II. Background and Discussion of the
Final Rule
On July 3, 2008, FNS published a
proposed rule in the Federal Register
(73 FR 38155) to amend the regulations
for FDPIR at 7 CFR part 253. The
proposed changes would improve
program service by: (1) Bringing the
maximum level of allowable resources
in line with SNAP, including the
establishment of a resource limit of
$3,000 for households with a disabled
member and a provision for an annual
inflation adjustment to the resource
limits starting in FY 2009; (2) allowing
a resource exclusion for the first $1,500
of the equity value of one pre-paid
funeral arrangement per household
member; and (3) allowing households in
which all members are elderly and/or
disabled to be certified for up to 24
months. It was intended that these
proposed changes would also impact
the operation of FDPIHO under which
the eligibility and certification
provisions of 7 CFR part 253 are
adopted by reference at 7 CFR 254.5(a).
Comments were solicited through
September 2, 2008 on the provisions of
the proposed rulemaking. FNS received
three comments from the public on the
proposed regulatory changes. These
comments are discussed below and are
available for review at https://
www.regulation.gov. Enter ‘‘FNS–2007–
0042’’ in the box under ‘‘Search
Documents’’ and click on ‘‘Go’’ to view
the comments received.
In the following discussion and
regulatory text, the term ‘‘State agency,’’
as defined at 7 CFR 253.2, is used to
include ITOs authorized to operate
FDPIR and FDPIHO in accordance with
7 CFR parts 253 and 254. The term
‘‘FDPIR’’ is used in this final rule to refer
collectively to FDPIR and FDPIHO.
A. Bring the Maximum Level of
Allowable Resources in Line With SNAP
The July 3, 2008 rule proposed an
amendment to regulations at 7 CFR
253.6(d)(1) to bring the maximum level
of allowable resources in FDPIR in line
with those established for SNAP under
Section 5(g) of the Food and Nutrition
Act of 2008 (formerly the Food Stamp
Act of 1977) (7 U.S.C. 2014(g)). This
would mean: (1) A resource limit of
$3,000 for households with at least one
elderly or disabled member; (2) a
resource limit of $2,000 for households
without any elderly or disabled
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:06 Jan 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
members; and (3) annual inflationary
adjustments to the above resource limits
starting in FY 2009. The annual
resource limit adjustment is based on
increases to the Bureau of Labor
Standards Consumer Price Index for All
Urban Consumers for the 12-month
period ending the preceding June 30,
rounded down to the nearest $250
increment. Each adjustment is based on
the unrounded amount for the prior 12month period.
The rule also proposed two
conforming amendments to FDPIR
regulations. The first change would add
definitions for ‘‘elderly’’ and ‘‘disabled’’
at 7 CFR 253.2. These definitions
conform to the definitions used under
SNAP. The second amendment would
revise 7 CFR 253.7(c)(1) to state that
households must report within 10
calendar days when their countable
resources exceed the applicable
maximum allowable limit.
One commenter expressed support for
the proposed changes, especially the
annual inflationary adjustment to the
resource limits.
Another commenter opposed the
proposed changes to the resource
standards. The commenter stated that
program standards should be set
according to local economic conditions
rather than being based on state or
national data. As discussed in the
preamble to the July 3, 2008 proposed
rule, the proposed changes are intended
to bring FDPIR resource standards in
line with the resource limits prescribed
by Congress for SNAP. FDPIR was
established by Congress in 1977 as an
alternative to SNAP for low income
households living on or near Indian
reservations that did not have easy
access to SNAP offices and authorized
grocery stores. Consequently, FDPIR has
similar eligibility criteria to SNAP,
although certain administrative
requirements have been simplified and
streamlined under FDPIR.
Based on the above discussion of the
comments received, the proposed
changes to bring the maximum level of
allowable resources in FDPIR in line
with those established for SNAP are
retained in this final rule.
B. Resource Exclusion for the First
$1,500 of the Equity Value of One PrePaid Funeral Agreement per Household
Member
The July 3, 2008 rule proposed an
amendment to the regulations at 7 CFR
253.6(d)(2)(i) to ensure that pre-paid
funeral agreements with equity value
are treated the same under FDPIR as
under SNAP. As proposed, the first
$1,500 of equity value of one pre-paid
funeral agreement per household
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4471
member would not be counted as a
household resource under FDPIR. A prepaid funeral agreement is a pre-need
agreement or contract, with a bona fide
funeral home, cemeterian, burial
planner, etc., for funeral and/or burial
services.
In many instances pre-paid funeral
agreements are already excluded as a
resource under current FDPIR policy, or
have no equity value and would not be
counted as a resource. For example,
funeral expenses are often covered
under life insurance policies and
current FDPIR policy allows a resource
exclusion for the cash value of life
insurance policies. Also, an irrevocable
pre-paid funeral contract that has no
cash surrender value would not be
counted as a resource under FDPIR.
Certain pre-paid funeral agreements,
however, have equity value. This means
that they have a specific value that can
be legally converted to cash by the
household member and used for normal
living expenses. Under current FDPIR
policy, the full equity value of a prepaid funeral agreement would be
counted as a resource to the household.
Therefore the intent of the proposed
change was to provide a resource
exclusion, as is provided under SNAP,
for those pre-paid funeral agreements
that have equity value, but are not
currently excluded as a resource under
FDPIR. FNS proposed a regulatory
change that would ensure that those
pre-paid funeral agreements would be
treated the same under FDPIR as under
SNAP.
One commenter stated that their
Tribal members, by and large, do not
purchase pre-paid funeral agreements,
and that many Tribes provide funeral
assistance to their membership. FNS
recognizes the valuable service that
Tribes provide in assisting members
with their funeral expenses. However,
for those individuals that have had to
use their own resources to secure their
funeral arrangements in advance, FNS
believes that the SNAP provision is a
reasonable approach for providing an
exclusion for pre-paid funeral
agreements that have equity value.
Another commenter stated that not all
eligible FDPIR participants have
resources earmarked for funeral
expenses, but that funds set aside for
funeral expenses should be verified.
This comment may be in reference to
households that have funds for funeral
expenses comingled with other
household savings. Under current
FDPIR policy and this final rule, funds,
including those held for funeral
expenses, held in a checking or savings
account that are accessible to a
household for normal living expenses
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
4472
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
are considered a resource to the
household. As discussed in the
preamble to the July 3, 2008 proposed
rule, there is no verifiable way to
distinguish the funds held for funeral
expenses from a household’s general
savings when the funds are comingled.
One of the commenters suggested that
we define ‘‘equity value’’ in the
regulations and provide an example to
clarify the proposed provision. We have
added the definition of ‘‘equity value’’
and an example to 7 CFR 253.6(d)(2)(i).
Based on the above discussion of the
comments received, the proposed
changes to allow a resource exclusion
for the first $1,500 of the equity value
of one pre-paid funeral agreement per
household member are retained in this
final rule with the addition of the
definition of ‘‘equity value’’ and an
example to 7 CFR 253.6(d)(2)(i), as
discussed above.
C. Extend Certification Periods Up to 24
Months for Households in Which All
Members Are Elderly or Disabled
The July 3, 2008 rule proposed the
amendment of regulations at 7 CFR
253.7(b)(2) to allow households in
which all members are elderly and/or
disabled to be certified for up to 24
months. Under current FDPIR policy, no
household can be certified for more than
12 months. This change is intended to
benefit elderly and/or disabled
households that have stable incomes
and household circumstances.
One commenter stated that this
change ‘‘would help Tribal members
very little’’ and would exclude
individuals and families who have the
right by Treaty to receive rations until
they ‘‘are able to support themselves.’’
The commenter stated that ‘‘(i)f the
harsher Food Stamp regulations are
applied to FDPIR programs, even fewer
Tribal members will be eligible for
participation.’’ The intent of the SNAP
provision is to remove potential barriers
to participation by allowing elderly and/
or disabled households to continue to
participate beyond the current 12-month
limitation without a recertification
interview. Eliminating the need for a
recertification interview after the first 12
months of certification would make it
easier for low-income elderly and/or
disabled households to stay enrolled in
FDPIR.
Two commenters addressed the
reporting requirements for households.
One commenter stated that the proposed
change would ‘‘help FDPIR reduce the
cost of certification but each participant
must self report if their eligibility or
economic circumstances change.’’
Another commenter remarked that
households must be informed that they
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:06 Jan 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
are still subject to the requirement to
report changes in household
circumstances. The proposed change
would not modify the requirement at 7
CFR 253.7(c) for households to report
changes in household composition and/
or income that occur during their
certification period. Each State agency is
required to develop procedures for
when and how changes in
circumstances are reported by
households. Although the proposed
change would require the State agency
to contact the household at the end of
the first 12 months so that the State
agency can determine if there are any
changes in circumstances at that time,
this action by the State agency would
not relieve the household of its
responsibility to report changes in
income or household composition in
accordance with 7 CFR 253.7(c).
D. Other Comments
One commenter stated that FNS failed
to consult with Indian Tribal
governments prior to the publication of
the proposed rulemaking and has failed
to comply with Executive Order 13175
on government-to-government
relationships with Indian Tribes. FNS’
actions in relation to this rule are in
compliance with Departmental
Regulation Number 1340–006 and
Executive Order 13175 in regard to
consultation and coordination with
Indian Tribal governments. FNS
published a proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register on July 3, 2008 with a
60-day comment period. In addition, on
July 3, 2008 FNS specifically advised
the ITOs and State agencies that
administer FDPIR of the publication of
the proposed rule and the 60-day
comment period. The proposed rule was
posted for public viewing on the FDPIR
Web site at https://www.fns.usda.gov/
fdd/programs/fdpir. Prior to the
publication of the proposed rulemaking,
the provisions of the proposed rule were
discussed with tribal and State
representatives of the ITOs and State
agencies that administer FDPIR at
NAFDPIR conferences in 2001, 2003,
2004, and 2008. Also, as discussed in
the preamble to the proposed
rulemaking, the provision for a resource
exclusion for the first $1,500 of the
equity value of one pre-paid funeral
agreement per household member was
proposed in response to a resolution
passed by NAFDPIR at its annual
conference in 2000. The proposal for a
regulatory change was discussed in a
January 3, 2001 letter from the FNS
Food Distribution Division Director to
the President of NAFDPIR.
The same commenter stated that the
proposed rulemaking violated Treaty
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Rights by requiring FDPIR to operate
like SNAP. The commenter also stated
its view that the ‘‘new USDA approach
in treating FDPIR like the Food Stamp
Program’’ was a means taken by FNS to
evade its trust responsibility. FNS’
approach to align SNAP and FDPIR
policies is not new. This has been FNS’
approach since the establishment of
FDPIR in 1977. This approach is based
on Congressional intent that FDPIR
serve as an alternative to SNAP for lowincome households that reside on or
near Indian reservations. The preamble
to the December 8, 1978 proposed
rulemaking (43 FR 57798) provides the
rationale for FNS’ approach to align the
policies of the two programs and a
detailed history of FNS’ consultation
efforts with tribal governments and
other stakeholders in the development
of those policies.
The same commenter stated that
‘‘there should be full funding for each
eligible program participant so that the
food distributed fully meets the needs of
those participants.’’ The purchase and
distribution of USDA foods under
FDPIR is authorized by section 4(b) of
the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 2013(b)) and section 4(a) of the
Agriculture and Consumer Protection
Act of 1973 (7 U.S.C. 612c note). FNS
administers FDPIR in accordance with
these legislative mandates. Section 4(a)
of the Agriculture and Consumer
Protection Act of 1973 directs the
Secretary ‘‘to improve the variety and
quantity of commodities supplied to
Indians in order to provide them an
opportunity to obtain a more nutritious
diet.’’ The joint conference committee
report that accompanied the amending
legislation in 1977 noted that the
conferees did not intend that ‘‘the
commodity package will necessarily in
and of itself constitute a ‘nutritionally
adequate diet’ ’’ (H. Conf. Rpt. 95–599, p.
205 (September 12, 1977)). As such, the
preamble to the December 8, 1978
proposed rulemaking states that it is the
intent of the Department to offer a food
package that ‘‘represents an acceptable
alternative to Food Stamp Program
benefits’’ (43 FR 57798). Moreover,
Congress funds FDPIR through annual
appropriations and FNS uses all
available funding to support the
Program. FNS does not have authority to
exceed the appropriated funding levels
for the purposes suggested by the
commenter.
Based on the above discussion of the
comments received, the proposed
changes for extended certification
periods for elderly and/or disabled
households are retained in this final
rule.
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 253
Administrative practice and
procedure, Food assistance programs,
Grant programs, Social programs,
Indians, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Surplus agricultural
commodities.
■ Accordingly, 7 CFR part 253 is
amended as follows:
PART 253—ADMINISTRATION OF THE
FOOD DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM FOR
HOUSEHOLDS ON INDIAN
RESERVATIONS
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 253 is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 91 Stat. 958 (7 U.S.C. 2011–
2036).
2. In § 253.2:
a. Remove paragraph designations (a)
through (j) and list the definitions in
alphabetical order.
■ b. Add new definitions entitled
‘‘Disabled member’’ and ‘‘Elderly
member’’ in alphabetical order to read as
follows:
■
■
§ 253.2
Definitions.
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
Disabled member means a member of
a household who:
(1) Receives supplemental security
income benefits under title XVI of the
Social Security Act or disability or
blindness payments under titles I, II, X,
XIV, or XVI of the Social Security Act;
(2) Receives federally- or Stateadministered supplemental benefits
under section 1616(a) of the Social
Security Act provided that the eligibility
to receive the benefits is based upon the
disability or blindness criteria used
under title XVI of the Social Security
Act;
(3) Receives federally- or Stateadministered supplemental benefits
under section 212(a) of Public Law 93–
66;
(4) Receives disability retirement
benefits from a governmental agency
because of a disability considered
permanent under section 221(i) of the
Social Security Act;
(5) Is a veteran with a serviceconnected or non-service-connected
disability rated by the Veteran’s
Administration (VA) as total or paid as
total by the VA under title 38 of the
United States Code;
(6) Is a veteran considered by the VA
to be in need of regular aid and
attendance or permanently housebound
under title 38 of the United States Code;
(7) Is a surviving spouse of a veteran
and considered by the VA to be in need
of regular aid and attendance or
permanently housebound or a surviving
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:06 Jan 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
child of a veteran and considered by the
VA to be permanently incapable of selfsupport under title 38 of the United
States Code;
(8) Is a surviving spouse or surviving
child of a veteran and considered by the
VA to be entitled to compensation for a
service-connected death or pension
benefits for a non-service-connected
death under title 38 of the United States
Code and has a disability considered
permanent under section 221(i) of the
Social Security Act. ‘‘Entitled’’ as used
in this definition refers to those
veterans’ surviving spouses and
surviving children who are receiving the
compensation or pension benefits stated
or have been approved for such
payments, but are not yet receiving
them;
(9) Receives an annuity payment
under: Section 2(a)(1)(iv) of the Railroad
Retirement Act of 1974 and is
determined to be eligible to receive
Medicare by the Railroad Retirement
Board; or section 2(a)(1)(v) of the
Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 and is
determined to be disabled based upon
the criteria used under title XVI of the
Social Security Act; or
(10) Is a recipient of interim
assistance benefits pending the receipt
of Supplemented Security Income, a
recipient of disability related medical
assistance under title XIX of the Social
Security Act, or a recipient of disabilitybased State general assistance benefits
provided that the eligibility to receive
any of these benefits is based upon
disability or blindness criteria
established by the State agency, which
are at least as stringent as those used
under title XVI of the Social Security
Act (as set forth at 20 CFR part 416,
subpart I, Determining Disability and
Blindness as defined in Title XVI).
Elderly member means a member of a
household who is sixty years of age or
older.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 253.6:
■ a. Amend paragraph (d)(1) by revising
the second sentence; and
■ b. Revise paragraph (d)(2)(i).
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
§ 253.6
Eligibility of households.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) * * * The household’s maximum
allowable resources shall not exceed the
limits established for the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program.
(2) * * *
(i) The cash value of life insurance
policies; pension funds, including funds
in pension plans with interest penalties
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4473
for early withdrawals, such as a Keogh
plan or an Individual Retirement
Account, as long as the funds remain in
the pension plans; and the first $1,500
of the equity value of one bona fide prepaid funeral agreement per household
member. The equity value of a pre-paid
funeral agreement is the value that can
be legally converted to cash by the
household member. For example, an
individual has a $1,200 pre-paid funeral
agreement with a funeral home. The
conditions of the agreement allow the
household to cancel the agreement and
receive a refund of the $1,200 minus a
service fee of $50. The equity value of
the pre-paid funeral agreement is
$1,150.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. In § 253.7:
■ a. Amend paragraph (b)(2)(iii) by
removing the last sentence;
■ b. Add new paragraph (b)(2)(iv); and
■ c. Amend paragraph (c)(1) by revising
the third sentence;
The revision and addition read as
follows:
§ 253.7
Certification of households.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) In no event may a certification
period exceed 12 months, except that
households in which all adult members
are elderly and/or disabled may be
certified for up to 24 months.
Households assigned certification
periods that are longer than 12 months
must be contacted by the State agency
at least once every 12 months to
determine if the household wishes to
continue to participate in the program
and whether there are any changes in
household circumstances that would
warrant a redetermination of eligibility
or a change in benefit level. The State
agency may use any method it chooses
for this contact, including a face-to-face
interview, telephone call or a home
visit. Contact with the household’s
authorized representative would not
satisfy this requirement; the State
agency must contact a household
member. The case file must document
the contact with the household and
include the date of contact, method of
contact, name of person contacted,
whether the household wishes to
continue to participate, and whether
changes in household circumstances
would warrant a redetermination of
eligibility or a change in benefit level.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) * * * Households must also
report within 10 calendar days when
countable resources, which are
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
4474
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
identified in § 253.6(d)(2), exceed the
maximum allowable limits as described
at § 253.6(d)(1). * * *
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: January 12, 2010.
Kevin W. Concannon,
Under Secretary, Food, Nutrition, and
Consumer Services.
[FR Doc. 2010–1708 Filed 1–27–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[Docket Nos. EE–RM/TP–99–450 and EE–
RM/TP–05–500]
RIN 1904–AA96 and 1904–AB53
Energy Conservation Program:
Certification, Compliance, and
Enforcement Requirements for Certain
Consumer Products and Commercial
and Industrial Equipment; Correction
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule; technical correction.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document contains a
technical correction to the final rule
regarding the certification, compliance
and enforcement regulations that was
published on January 5, 2010. In that
final rule, the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) adopted regulations to
implement reporting requirements for
energy conservation standards and
energy use, and to address other
matters, including compliance
certification, prohibited actions, and
enforcement procedures for specific
consumer products and commercial and
industrial equipment. Due to drafting
errors, language added to the rule in one
amendment was deleted from the rule
by another amendment, and certain
erroneous internal cross references were
made. This correction addresses these
errors.
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
DATES: This technical correction is
effective February 4, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael McCabe, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121, (202) 586–
9155. E-mail:
Michael.McCabe@ee.doe.gov.
Michael Kido, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–72, 1000 Independence Avenue,
SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121, (202)
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:06 Jan 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
586–9507. E-mail:
Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On January 5, 2010, the U.S.
Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of
Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy (EERE) published a final rule
titled ‘‘Certification, Compliance, and
Enforcement Requirements for Certain
Consumer Products and Commercial
and Industrial Equipment.’’ 75 FR 652.
Since the publication of that rule, it has
come to DOE’s attention that due to a
technical oversight, a certain part of the
final regulations was inadvertently
deleted from the final rule. DOE did not
intend to remove this language from its
regulations and through this correction
document DOE reinserts this
inadvertently deleted language.
Additionally, certain sections of the
regulatory text have an internal
referencing error.
II. Need for Correction
As published, the final regulation
erroneously removed two provisions
that DOE had intended to reserve (10
CFR 431.171) and to amend (10 CFR
431.172). This document intends to
reestablishes these provisions. In FR
Doc. E9–30886, appearing in the notice
beginning on page 652 in the Federal
Register of Tuesday, January 5, 2010,
the following corrections are made:
Subpart J—[Corrected]
1. On page 667, in the second column,
correct the table of contents for subpart
J to part 431 to read as follows:
Subpart J—Provisions for Commercial
Heating, Ventilating, Air-Conditioning and
Water Heating Products
Sec.
431.171 Purpose and scope. [Reserved]
431.172 Definitions.
431.173 Requirements applicable to all
manufacturers.
431.174 Additional requirements applicable
to Voluntary Independent Certification
Program participants.
431.175 Additional requirements applicable
to non-Voluntary Independent
Certification Program participants.
431.176 Voluntary Independent
Certification Programs.
2. On page 667, in the second column,
directly below the heading of subpart J,
add and reserve § 431.171, and add
§ 431.172, to read as follows:
§ 431.171
Purpose and scope. [Reserved]
§ 431.172
Definitions.
The following definitions apply for
purposes of subparts D through G, J
through K and subpart T of this part.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Other terms in these subparts shall be
defined elsewhere in the Part and, if not
defined in this part, shall have the
meaning set forth in section 340 of the
Act.
Alternate efficiency determination
method or AEDM means a method of
calculating the efficiency of a
commercial HVAC and WH product, in
terms of the descriptor used in or under
section 342(a) of the Act to state the
energy conservation standard for that
product.
Basic model means, with respect to a
commercial HVAC & WH product, all
units of such product, manufactured by
one manufacturer, which have the same
primary energy source and which do not
have any differing electrical, physical,
or functional characteristics that affect
energy consumption.
Commercial HVAC & WH product
means any small or large commercial
package air-conditioning and heating
equipment, packaged terminal air
conditioner, packaged terminal heat
pump, commercial packaged boiler, hot
water supply boiler, commercial warm
air furnace, instantaneous water heater,
storage water heater, or unfired hot
water storage tank.
Flue loss means the sum of the
sensible heat and latent heat above room
temperature of the flue gases leaving the
appliance.
Industrial equipment means an article
of equipment, regardless of whether it is
in fact distributed in commerce for
industrial or commercial use, of a type
which:
(1) In operation consumes, or is
designed to consume energy;
(2) To any significant extent, is
distributed in commerce for industrial
or commercial use; and
(3) Is not a ‘‘covered product’’ as
defined in Section 321(2) of EPCA, 42
U.S.C. 6291(2), other than a component
of a covered product with respect to
which there is in effect a determination
under Section 341(c) of EPCA, 42 U.S.C.
6312(c).
Private labeler means, with respect to
a commercial HVAC & WH product, an
owner of a brand or trademark on the
label of a product which bears a private
label. A commercial HVAC & WH
product bears a private label if:
(1) Such product (or its container) is
labeled with the brand or trademark of
a person other than a manufacturer of
such product;
(2) The person with whose brand or
trademark such product (or container) is
labeled has authorized or caused such
product to be so labeled; and
(3) The brand or trademark of a
manufacturer of such product does not
appear on such label.
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 18 (Thursday, January 28, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4469-4474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-1708]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2010 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 4469]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
7 CFR Part 253
[FNS-2007-0042]
RIN 0584-AD12
Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations: Resource Limits
and Exclusions, and Extended Certification Periods
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is amending the
regulations for the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations
(FDPIR). The changes will improve program service, ensure consistency
between FDPIR and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
(formerly the Food Stamp Program), and respond to concerns expressed by
the National Association of Food Distribution Programs on Indian
Reservations (NAFDPIR) that the current FDPIR resource limits are
insufficient for the target populations and serve as a barrier to
participation. The rule will increase the maximum level of allowable
resources to the same level permitted under SNAP (including the
establishment of a resource limit of $3,000 for FDPIR households with a
disabled member in accordance with Section 4107 of the Farm Security
and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-171), and annual
adjustments for inflation in accordance with Section 4104 of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-246), allow a
resource exclusion for the first $1,500 of the equity value of one pre-
paid funeral arrangement per household member, and allow households in
which all members are elderly and/or disabled to be certified for up to
24 months.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective March 1, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Castro, Chief, Policy Branch,
Food Distribution Division, Food and Nutrition Service, 3101 Park
Center Drive, Room 506, Alexandria, Virginia 22302, or by telephone
(703) 305-2662.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Procedural Matters
II. Background and Discussion of the Final Rule
I. Procedural Matters
A. Executive Order 12866
This rule has been determined to be significant, and was reviewed
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order
12866.
B. Regulatory Impact Analysis
1. Need for Action
This action is needed to ensure that regulations pertaining to
certification period assignments for elderly and/or disabled households
and resource standards are consistent between FDPIR and SNAP and to
reflect provisions contained in the Farm Security and Rural Investment
Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-171), which established a resource limit of
$3,000 for SNAP households with a disabled member, and in Section 4104
of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-246),
which established an annual inflation adjustment to the SNAP resource
limits starting in fiscal year (FY) 2009.
2. Benefits
This rule amends FDPIR regulations by aligning several provisions
with their counterparts in the SNAP. These regulatory changes are
designed to help ensure that FDPIR benefits are provided to low-income
households living on or near Indian reservations that are in need of
nutrition assistance. Because FDPIR regulations regarding resource
limits and exclusions are altered by this rule, participation could
potentially increase, thus expanding access to those eligible for the
program and increasing nutritional benefits to the targeted population.
FNS has projected the impact of each change on FDPIR participation.
However, we are unable to determine the total number of individuals
that might be added as a result of this rule. An individual might
benefit from more than one provision and the effect of the overlap
could not be determined.
3. Cost
This action is not expected to significantly increase costs of
State and local agencies, or their commercial contractors, in using
donated foods. The combined impact of the changes in this rulemaking is
projected to increase program costs by $68,000 in FY 2010 and $852,000
over a five-year period (FY 2010-2014). These increased costs are
attributable to potential increases in participation.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed with regard to the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601-612). The Under
Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services has certified that
this action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number
of small entities. While program participants and Indian Tribal
Organizations (ITOs) and State agencies that administer the FDPIR and
the Food Distribution Program for Indian Households in Oklahoma
(FDPIHO) will be affected by this rulemaking, the economic effect will
not be significant.
D. Public Law 104-4
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the
Department generally must prepare a written statement, including a
cost/benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with Federal
mandates that may result in expenditures to State, local, or Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year. When such a statement is needed for a
rule, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the Department to
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
and adopt the least costly, more cost-effective or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule.
This rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
[[Page 4470]]
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) that impose on State, local or
Tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any
one year. This rule is, therefore, not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 12372
The program addressed in this action is listed in the Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.567. For the reasons set forth
in the final rule in 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V and related Notice
published at 48 FR 29114, June 24, 1983, the donation of foods in such
programs is included in the scope of Executive Order 12372, which
requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 requires Federal agencies to consider the
impact of their regulatory actions on State and local governments.
Where such actions have federalism implications, agencies are directed
to provide a statement for inclusion in the preamble to the regulations
describing the agency's considerations in terms of the three categories
called for under section (6)(b)(2)(B) of Executive Order 13132.
1. Prior Consultation With Tribal/State Officials
The programs affected by the regulatory provisions in this rule are
all Tribal or State-administered, federally funded programs. FNS'
national headquarters and regional offices have formal and informal
discussions with State officials on an ongoing basis regarding program
issues relating to the distribution of donated foods. FNS meets
annually with NAFDPIR, a national group of State agencies, to discuss
issues relating to food distribution.
2. Nature of Concerns and the Need To Issue This Rule
This rule will provide consistency between FDPIR and SNAP in regard
to certification period assignments for elderly and/or disabled
households and resource standards. The rule was prompted, in part, by a
resolution passed by NAFDPIR in FY 2000. NAFDPIR expressed concern that
the current FDPIR resource limit was insufficient for the target
population and served as a barrier to participation. The rule was also
prompted, in part, by a provision contained in the Farm Security and
Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-171), enacted on May 13,
2002. Section 4107 of Public Law 107-171 established a SNAP resource
limit of $3,000 for households with a disabled member. Also, Section
4104 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-
246), enacted on May 22, 2008, established an annual inflation factor
adjustment to the SNAP resource limits. That provision was effective
October 1, 2008. The other regulatory provisions finalized in this rule
are also consistent with SNAP provisions.
3. Extent to Which the Department Meets Those Concerns
The Department has considered the impact of the final rule on State
agencies. The Department does not expect the provisions of this rule to
conflict with any State or local law, regulations or policies. The
overall effect of this rule is to ensure that low-income households
living on or near Indian reservations receive nutrition assistance.
This rule will ensure consistency between FDPIR and SNAP in regard to
certification period assignments for elderly and/or disabled households
and resource standards.
G. Executive Order 12988
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. Although the provisions of this rule are not
expected to conflict with any State or local law, regulations, or
policies, the rule is intended to have preemptive effect with respect
to any State or local laws, regulations or policies that conflict with
its provisions or that would otherwise impede its full implementation.
This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect. Prior to any
judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule or the application of
its provisions all applicable administrative procedures must be
exhausted.
H. Civil Rights Impact Analysis
The Office of Civil Rights (OCR) has reviewed this rule in
accordance with Departmental Regulation 4300-4, ``Civil Rights Impact
Analysis'', to identify and address any major civil rights impact the
rule might have on protected classes. Due to the unavailability of
data, OCR cannot assess disproportionate impact on women, minorities,
and persons with disabilities. OCR believes the intent of this rule is
not to limit or reduce the ability of participants to receive the
benefits of donated foods in the FDPIR, nor is its intent to reduce or
eliminate equal access to participation in FDPIR.
I. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35; see 5
CFR part 1320) requires that OMB approve all collections of information
by a Federal agency from the public before they can be implemented.
Respondents are not required to respond to any collection of
information unless it displays a current valid OMB control number.
Proposed information collection burden related to the provisions in
this final rule and burden changes related to the implementation of a
new Web-Based Supply Chain Management System (WBSCM) are currently at
OMB for review under OMB No. 0584-0293, expiration date November 30,
2009. These information collection requirements will not become
effective until approved by OMB. Once they have been approved, FNS will
publish a separate action in the Federal Register announcing OMB's
approval.
This rule will not change the current recordkeeping burden for ITOs
and State agencies under OMB No. 0584-0293, but it will impact the
reporting burden due to an expected change in number of households
participating in FDPIR as a result of this rule. Households complete an
application process to participate in the program and are recertified
at intervals determined by the State agency or ITO. The current
estimated annual reporting burden for the certification or
recertification of households to participate in FDPIR is 2,329.05. The
provisions of this rule are expected to increase that burden to
approximately 2,379.66, which is an increase of 50.61 burden hours.
The approved and proposed information collection estimates for OMB
No. 0584-0293 are as follows:
Current estimated total annual responses: 1,160,746.
Proposed estimated total annual responses: 1,655,720.
Difference due to program changes, as reflected in this final rule:
99.
Difference due to WBSCM implementation: 494,875.
Current estimated annual recordkeeping and reporting burden:
1,073,701.
Proposed estimated annual recordkeeping and reporting burden:
1,079,172.
Difference due to program changes, as reflected in this final rule:
51.
Difference due to WBSCM implementation: 5,420.
J. E-Government Act Compliance
The Department is committed to complying with the E-Government Act
[[Page 4471]]
to promote the use of the Internet and other information technologies
to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government
information and services, and for other purposes.
II. Background and Discussion of the Final Rule
On July 3, 2008, FNS published a proposed rule in the Federal
Register (73 FR 38155) to amend the regulations for FDPIR at 7 CFR part
253. The proposed changes would improve program service by: (1)
Bringing the maximum level of allowable resources in line with SNAP,
including the establishment of a resource limit of $3,000 for
households with a disabled member and a provision for an annual
inflation adjustment to the resource limits starting in FY 2009; (2)
allowing a resource exclusion for the first $1,500 of the equity value
of one pre-paid funeral arrangement per household member; and (3)
allowing households in which all members are elderly and/or disabled to
be certified for up to 24 months. It was intended that these proposed
changes would also impact the operation of FDPIHO under which the
eligibility and certification provisions of 7 CFR part 253 are adopted
by reference at 7 CFR 254.5(a).
Comments were solicited through September 2, 2008 on the provisions
of the proposed rulemaking. FNS received three comments from the public
on the proposed regulatory changes. These comments are discussed below
and are available for review at https://www.regulation.gov. Enter ``FNS-
2007-0042'' in the box under ``Search Documents'' and click on ``Go''
to view the comments received.
In the following discussion and regulatory text, the term ``State
agency,'' as defined at 7 CFR 253.2, is used to include ITOs authorized
to operate FDPIR and FDPIHO in accordance with 7 CFR parts 253 and 254.
The term ``FDPIR'' is used in this final rule to refer collectively to
FDPIR and FDPIHO.
A. Bring the Maximum Level of Allowable Resources in Line With SNAP
The July 3, 2008 rule proposed an amendment to regulations at 7 CFR
253.6(d)(1) to bring the maximum level of allowable resources in FDPIR
in line with those established for SNAP under Section 5(g) of the Food
and Nutrition Act of 2008 (formerly the Food Stamp Act of 1977) (7
U.S.C. 2014(g)). This would mean: (1) A resource limit of $3,000 for
households with at least one elderly or disabled member; (2) a resource
limit of $2,000 for households without any elderly or disabled members;
and (3) annual inflationary adjustments to the above resource limits
starting in FY 2009. The annual resource limit adjustment is based on
increases to the Bureau of Labor Standards Consumer Price Index for All
Urban Consumers for the 12-month period ending the preceding June 30,
rounded down to the nearest $250 increment. Each adjustment is based on
the unrounded amount for the prior 12-month period.
The rule also proposed two conforming amendments to FDPIR
regulations. The first change would add definitions for ``elderly'' and
``disabled'' at 7 CFR 253.2. These definitions conform to the
definitions used under SNAP. The second amendment would revise 7 CFR
253.7(c)(1) to state that households must report within 10 calendar
days when their countable resources exceed the applicable maximum
allowable limit.
One commenter expressed support for the proposed changes,
especially the annual inflationary adjustment to the resource limits.
Another commenter opposed the proposed changes to the resource
standards. The commenter stated that program standards should be set
according to local economic conditions rather than being based on state
or national data. As discussed in the preamble to the July 3, 2008
proposed rule, the proposed changes are intended to bring FDPIR
resource standards in line with the resource limits prescribed by
Congress for SNAP. FDPIR was established by Congress in 1977 as an
alternative to SNAP for low income households living on or near Indian
reservations that did not have easy access to SNAP offices and
authorized grocery stores. Consequently, FDPIR has similar eligibility
criteria to SNAP, although certain administrative requirements have
been simplified and streamlined under FDPIR.
Based on the above discussion of the comments received, the
proposed changes to bring the maximum level of allowable resources in
FDPIR in line with those established for SNAP are retained in this
final rule.
B. Resource Exclusion for the First $1,500 of the Equity Value of One
Pre-Paid Funeral Agreement per Household Member
The July 3, 2008 rule proposed an amendment to the regulations at 7
CFR 253.6(d)(2)(i) to ensure that pre-paid funeral agreements with
equity value are treated the same under FDPIR as under SNAP. As
proposed, the first $1,500 of equity value of one pre-paid funeral
agreement per household member would not be counted as a household
resource under FDPIR. A pre-paid funeral agreement is a pre-need
agreement or contract, with a bona fide funeral home, cemeterian,
burial planner, etc., for funeral and/or burial services.
In many instances pre-paid funeral agreements are already excluded
as a resource under current FDPIR policy, or have no equity value and
would not be counted as a resource. For example, funeral expenses are
often covered under life insurance policies and current FDPIR policy
allows a resource exclusion for the cash value of life insurance
policies. Also, an irrevocable pre-paid funeral contract that has no
cash surrender value would not be counted as a resource under FDPIR.
Certain pre-paid funeral agreements, however, have equity value.
This means that they have a specific value that can be legally
converted to cash by the household member and used for normal living
expenses. Under current FDPIR policy, the full equity value of a pre-
paid funeral agreement would be counted as a resource to the household.
Therefore the intent of the proposed change was to provide a resource
exclusion, as is provided under SNAP, for those pre-paid funeral
agreements that have equity value, but are not currently excluded as a
resource under FDPIR. FNS proposed a regulatory change that would
ensure that those pre-paid funeral agreements would be treated the same
under FDPIR as under SNAP.
One commenter stated that their Tribal members, by and large, do
not purchase pre-paid funeral agreements, and that many Tribes provide
funeral assistance to their membership. FNS recognizes the valuable
service that Tribes provide in assisting members with their funeral
expenses. However, for those individuals that have had to use their own
resources to secure their funeral arrangements in advance, FNS believes
that the SNAP provision is a reasonable approach for providing an
exclusion for pre-paid funeral agreements that have equity value.
Another commenter stated that not all eligible FDPIR participants
have resources earmarked for funeral expenses, but that funds set aside
for funeral expenses should be verified. This comment may be in
reference to households that have funds for funeral expenses comingled
with other household savings. Under current FDPIR policy and this final
rule, funds, including those held for funeral expenses, held in a
checking or savings account that are accessible to a household for
normal living expenses
[[Page 4472]]
are considered a resource to the household. As discussed in the
preamble to the July 3, 2008 proposed rule, there is no verifiable way
to distinguish the funds held for funeral expenses from a household's
general savings when the funds are comingled.
One of the commenters suggested that we define ``equity value'' in
the regulations and provide an example to clarify the proposed
provision. We have added the definition of ``equity value'' and an
example to 7 CFR 253.6(d)(2)(i).
Based on the above discussion of the comments received, the
proposed changes to allow a resource exclusion for the first $1,500 of
the equity value of one pre-paid funeral agreement per household member
are retained in this final rule with the addition of the definition of
``equity value'' and an example to 7 CFR 253.6(d)(2)(i), as discussed
above.
C. Extend Certification Periods Up to 24 Months for Households in Which
All Members Are Elderly or Disabled
The July 3, 2008 rule proposed the amendment of regulations at 7
CFR 253.7(b)(2) to allow households in which all members are elderly
and/or disabled to be certified for up to 24 months. Under current
FDPIR policy, no household can be certified for more than 12 months.
This change is intended to benefit elderly and/or disabled households
that have stable incomes and household circumstances.
One commenter stated that this change ``would help Tribal members
very little'' and would exclude individuals and families who have the
right by Treaty to receive rations until they ``are able to support
themselves.'' The commenter stated that ``(i)f the harsher Food Stamp
regulations are applied to FDPIR programs, even fewer Tribal members
will be eligible for participation.'' The intent of the SNAP provision
is to remove potential barriers to participation by allowing elderly
and/or disabled households to continue to participate beyond the
current 12-month limitation without a recertification interview.
Eliminating the need for a recertification interview after the first 12
months of certification would make it easier for low-income elderly
and/or disabled households to stay enrolled in FDPIR.
Two commenters addressed the reporting requirements for households.
One commenter stated that the proposed change would ``help FDPIR reduce
the cost of certification but each participant must self report if
their eligibility or economic circumstances change.'' Another commenter
remarked that households must be informed that they are still subject
to the requirement to report changes in household circumstances. The
proposed change would not modify the requirement at 7 CFR 253.7(c) for
households to report changes in household composition and/or income
that occur during their certification period. Each State agency is
required to develop procedures for when and how changes in
circumstances are reported by households. Although the proposed change
would require the State agency to contact the household at the end of
the first 12 months so that the State agency can determine if there are
any changes in circumstances at that time, this action by the State
agency would not relieve the household of its responsibility to report
changes in income or household composition in accordance with 7 CFR
253.7(c).
D. Other Comments
One commenter stated that FNS failed to consult with Indian Tribal
governments prior to the publication of the proposed rulemaking and has
failed to comply with Executive Order 13175 on government-to-government
relationships with Indian Tribes. FNS' actions in relation to this rule
are in compliance with Departmental Regulation Number 1340-006 and
Executive Order 13175 in regard to consultation and coordination with
Indian Tribal governments. FNS published a proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register on July 3, 2008 with a 60-day comment period. In
addition, on July 3, 2008 FNS specifically advised the ITOs and State
agencies that administer FDPIR of the publication of the proposed rule
and the 60-day comment period. The proposed rule was posted for public
viewing on the FDPIR Web site at https://www.fns.usda.gov/fdd/programs/fdpir. Prior to the publication of the proposed rulemaking, the
provisions of the proposed rule were discussed with tribal and State
representatives of the ITOs and State agencies that administer FDPIR at
NAFDPIR conferences in 2001, 2003, 2004, and 2008. Also, as discussed
in the preamble to the proposed rulemaking, the provision for a
resource exclusion for the first $1,500 of the equity value of one pre-
paid funeral agreement per household member was proposed in response to
a resolution passed by NAFDPIR at its annual conference in 2000. The
proposal for a regulatory change was discussed in a January 3, 2001
letter from the FNS Food Distribution Division Director to the
President of NAFDPIR.
The same commenter stated that the proposed rulemaking violated
Treaty Rights by requiring FDPIR to operate like SNAP. The commenter
also stated its view that the ``new USDA approach in treating FDPIR
like the Food Stamp Program'' was a means taken by FNS to evade its
trust responsibility. FNS' approach to align SNAP and FDPIR policies is
not new. This has been FNS' approach since the establishment of FDPIR
in 1977. This approach is based on Congressional intent that FDPIR
serve as an alternative to SNAP for low-income households that reside
on or near Indian reservations. The preamble to the December 8, 1978
proposed rulemaking (43 FR 57798) provides the rationale for FNS'
approach to align the policies of the two programs and a detailed
history of FNS' consultation efforts with tribal governments and other
stakeholders in the development of those policies.
The same commenter stated that ``there should be full funding for
each eligible program participant so that the food distributed fully
meets the needs of those participants.'' The purchase and distribution
of USDA foods under FDPIR is authorized by section 4(b) of the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2013(b)) and section 4(a) of the
Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (7 U.S.C. 612c note).
FNS administers FDPIR in accordance with these legislative mandates.
Section 4(a) of the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act of 1973
directs the Secretary ``to improve the variety and quantity of
commodities supplied to Indians in order to provide them an opportunity
to obtain a more nutritious diet.'' The joint conference committee
report that accompanied the amending legislation in 1977 noted that the
conferees did not intend that ``the commodity package will necessarily
in and of itself constitute a `nutritionally adequate diet' '' (H.
Conf. Rpt. 95-599, p. 205 (September 12, 1977)). As such, the preamble
to the December 8, 1978 proposed rulemaking states that it is the
intent of the Department to offer a food package that ``represents an
acceptable alternative to Food Stamp Program benefits'' (43 FR 57798).
Moreover, Congress funds FDPIR through annual appropriations and FNS
uses all available funding to support the Program. FNS does not have
authority to exceed the appropriated funding levels for the purposes
suggested by the commenter.
Based on the above discussion of the comments received, the
proposed changes for extended certification periods for elderly and/or
disabled households are retained in this final rule.
[[Page 4473]]
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 253
Administrative practice and procedure, Food assistance programs,
Grant programs, Social programs, Indians, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Surplus agricultural commodities.
0
Accordingly, 7 CFR part 253 is amended as follows:
PART 253--ADMINISTRATION OF THE FOOD DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM FOR
HOUSEHOLDS ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 253 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 91 Stat. 958 (7 U.S.C. 2011-2036).
0
2. In Sec. 253.2:
0
a. Remove paragraph designations (a) through (j) and list the
definitions in alphabetical order.
0
b. Add new definitions entitled ``Disabled member'' and ``Elderly
member'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 253.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Disabled member means a member of a household who:
(1) Receives supplemental security income benefits under title XVI
of the Social Security Act or disability or blindness payments under
titles I, II, X, XIV, or XVI of the Social Security Act;
(2) Receives federally- or State-administered supplemental benefits
under section 1616(a) of the Social Security Act provided that the
eligibility to receive the benefits is based upon the disability or
blindness criteria used under title XVI of the Social Security Act;
(3) Receives federally- or State-administered supplemental benefits
under section 212(a) of Public Law 93-66;
(4) Receives disability retirement benefits from a governmental
agency because of a disability considered permanent under section
221(i) of the Social Security Act;
(5) Is a veteran with a service-connected or non-service-connected
disability rated by the Veteran's Administration (VA) as total or paid
as total by the VA under title 38 of the United States Code;
(6) Is a veteran considered by the VA to be in need of regular aid
and attendance or permanently housebound under title 38 of the United
States Code;
(7) Is a surviving spouse of a veteran and considered by the VA to
be in need of regular aid and attendance or permanently housebound or a
surviving child of a veteran and considered by the VA to be permanently
incapable of self-support under title 38 of the United States Code;
(8) Is a surviving spouse or surviving child of a veteran and
considered by the VA to be entitled to compensation for a service-
connected death or pension benefits for a non-service-connected death
under title 38 of the United States Code and has a disability
considered permanent under section 221(i) of the Social Security Act.
``Entitled'' as used in this definition refers to those veterans'
surviving spouses and surviving children who are receiving the
compensation or pension benefits stated or have been approved for such
payments, but are not yet receiving them;
(9) Receives an annuity payment under: Section 2(a)(1)(iv) of the
Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 and is determined to be eligible to
receive Medicare by the Railroad Retirement Board; or section
2(a)(1)(v) of the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 and is determined to
be disabled based upon the criteria used under title XVI of the Social
Security Act; or
(10) Is a recipient of interim assistance benefits pending the
receipt of Supplemented Security Income, a recipient of disability
related medical assistance under title XIX of the Social Security Act,
or a recipient of disability-based State general assistance benefits
provided that the eligibility to receive any of these benefits is based
upon disability or blindness criteria established by the State agency,
which are at least as stringent as those used under title XVI of the
Social Security Act (as set forth at 20 CFR part 416, subpart I,
Determining Disability and Blindness as defined in Title XVI).
Elderly member means a member of a household who is sixty years of
age or older.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 253.6:
0
a. Amend paragraph (d)(1) by revising the second sentence; and
0
b. Revise paragraph (d)(2)(i).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 253.6 Eligibility of households.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * * The household's maximum allowable resources shall not
exceed the limits established for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program.
(2) * * *
(i) The cash value of life insurance policies; pension funds,
including funds in pension plans with interest penalties for early
withdrawals, such as a Keogh plan or an Individual Retirement Account,
as long as the funds remain in the pension plans; and the first $1,500
of the equity value of one bona fide pre-paid funeral agreement per
household member. The equity value of a pre-paid funeral agreement is
the value that can be legally converted to cash by the household
member. For example, an individual has a $1,200 pre-paid funeral
agreement with a funeral home. The conditions of the agreement allow
the household to cancel the agreement and receive a refund of the
$1,200 minus a service fee of $50. The equity value of the pre-paid
funeral agreement is $1,150.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 253.7:
0
a. Amend paragraph (b)(2)(iii) by removing the last sentence;
0
b. Add new paragraph (b)(2)(iv); and
0
c. Amend paragraph (c)(1) by revising the third sentence;
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 253.7 Certification of households.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) In no event may a certification period exceed 12 months,
except that households in which all adult members are elderly and/or
disabled may be certified for up to 24 months. Households assigned
certification periods that are longer than 12 months must be contacted
by the State agency at least once every 12 months to determine if the
household wishes to continue to participate in the program and whether
there are any changes in household circumstances that would warrant a
redetermination of eligibility or a change in benefit level. The State
agency may use any method it chooses for this contact, including a
face-to-face interview, telephone call or a home visit. Contact with
the household's authorized representative would not satisfy this
requirement; the State agency must contact a household member. The case
file must document the contact with the household and include the date
of contact, method of contact, name of person contacted, whether the
household wishes to continue to participate, and whether changes in
household circumstances would warrant a redetermination of eligibility
or a change in benefit level.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * * Households must also report within 10 calendar days when
countable resources, which are
[[Page 4474]]
identified in Sec. 253.6(d)(2), exceed the maximum allowable limits as
described at Sec. 253.6(d)(1). * * *
* * * * *
Dated: January 12, 2010.
Kevin W. Concannon,
Under Secretary, Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services.
[FR Doc. 2010-1708 Filed 1-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P