Geographic Preference Option for the Procurement of Unprocessed Agricultural Products in Child Nutrition Programs, 22603-22608 [2011-9843]
Download as PDF
22603
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 76, No. 78
Friday, April 22, 2011
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.
Development Branch, Child Nutrition
Division, Food and Nutrition Service,
3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria,
Virginia 22302, or by telephone at (703)
305–2590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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.
Background
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
7 CFR Parts 210, 215, 220, 225, and 226
RIN 0584–AE03
Geographic Preference Option for the
Procurement of Unprocessed
Agricultural Products in Child Nutrition
Programs
Food and Nutrition Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The 2008 Farm Bill amended
the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act to direct that the Secretary of
Agriculture encourage institutions
operating Child Nutrition Programs to
purchase unprocessed locally grown
and locally raised agricultural products.
Effective October 1, 2008, institutions
receiving funds through the Child
Nutrition Programs may apply an
optional geographic preference in the
procurement of unprocessed locally
grown or locally raised agricultural
products. This provision applies to
institutions in all of the Child Nutrition
Programs, including the National School
Lunch Program, School Breakfast
Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable
Program, Special Milk Program for
Children, Child and Adult Care Food
Program and Summer Food Service
Program, as well as to purchases made
for these programs by the Department of
Defense Fresh Program. The provision
also applies to State agencies making
purchases on behalf of any of the
aforementioned Child Nutrition
Programs. The purpose of this rule is to
finalize the geographic preference
option in Child Nutrition Programs.
DATES: This rule is effective May 23,
2011.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Julie
Brewer, Chief, Policy and Program
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
Section 4302 of Public Law 110–246,
the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act
of 2008, amended section 9(j) of the
Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758(j)) to require
the Secretary of Agriculture to
encourage institutions operating Child
Nutrition Programs to purchase
unprocessed locally grown and locally
raised agricultural products. Pursuant to
section 4407 of Public Law 110–246,
beginning October 1, 2008, institutions
receiving funds as participants in the
Child Nutrition Programs may apply an
optional geographic preference in the
procurement of unprocessed locally
grown or locally raised agricultural
products. This provision applies to
institutions operating all of the Child
Nutrition Programs, including the
National School Lunch Program, School
Breakfast Program, Fresh Fruit and
Vegetable Program, Special Milk
Program, Child and Adult Care Food
Program and Summer Food Service
Program, as well as to purchases made
for these programs by the Department of
Defense Fresh Program. The provision
does not apply to purchases made by
the Department. However, the provision
does also apply to State agencies making
purchases on behalf of any of the
aforementioned Child Nutrition
Programs. The provisions were initially
implemented through policy
memoranda and explanatory question
and answer communications dated
January 9, 2009, July 22, 2009, and
October 9, 2009.
The Department published a proposed
rule on April 19, 2010, at 75 FR 20316
to solicit comments on the
incorporation of this procurement
option in Child Nutrition Program
regulations. The rule also served to
define the term ‘‘unprocessed locally
grown or locally raised agricultural
products’’ to ensure that both the intent
of Congress in providing for such a
procurement option was met and that
any such definition would facilitate ease
of implementation for institutions
participating in the Child Nutrition
Programs. The comment period ended
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
on June 18, 2010. The Department
received 77 comments on the proposed
rule. The following discussion provides
information on the comments as well as
a discussion of the clarifications and
changes made to the proposal based on
the comments received.
General Comments
In general, the comments received by
the Department were very supportive of
the regulation as proposed. Fifty-eight
comments commended the Department
for clarifying previous interpretations of
the geographic preference option for
procurement. Forty-four commentors
stated that they believed the updated
language of the rule more closely
complied with the Congressional
Conference Report language that
indicated that there is no intent to
preclude ‘‘de minimus handling and
preparation such as necessary to present
an agricultural product to a school food
authority in a useable form.’’ Fortyseven comments supported the
provision of the rule allowing the
purchasing entity, such as local school
food authorities, to determine the local
area to which a geographic preference
will be applied, indicating that they
agreed with the Department’s view that
individual circumstances and product
availability leads to the most successful
local and regional procurement
programs.
Procurement Issues
As indicated in the proposed rule,
traditionally, a geographic preference
established for procurements provides
bidders located in a specified
geographic area additional points or
credit calculated during the evaluation
of the proposals or bids received in
response to a solicitation. A geographic
preference is not a procurement setaside for bidders located in the specified
geographic area, guaranteeing them a
certain level or percentage of business.
In addition, including a geographic
preference in a procurement does not
preclude a bidder from outside the
specified geographic area from
competing for, and possibly being
awarded, the contract subject to the
geographic preference. Rather, a
geographic preference is a tool that gives
bidders in a specified geographic area a
specific, defined advantage in the
procurement process. We received a
number of comments specifically
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
22604
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
requesting guidance on how to apply
the geographic preference option in
procurement specifications and
procedures as well as questions on
procurement processes in general. The
Department published a policy
memorandum for program cooperators
on general procurement and geographic
preference issues on February 1, 2011
and will be publishing additional
guidance on procurement provisions
associated with implementation of the
geographic preference option included
in this final rule as needed. Therefore,
no changes have been made to the
procurement-specific provisions
included in the proposed rule and those
procurement provisions are finalized as
proposed.
Geographic Area
By utilizing the statutorily established
geographic preference option in Child
Nutrition Programs, purchasing
institutions, such as States, school food
authorities, child care institutions and
Summer Food Service Program (SFSP)
sponsors, may specifically identify the
geographic area within which
unprocessed locally raised and locally
grown agricultural products will
originate. As indicated in the proposed
rule, a responsive bidder would offer to
provide unprocessed locally raised and
locally grown agricultural products from
the specifically identified geographic
area. In most cases, we would expect
that a bidder would be located in the
identified geographic area, though it is
possible for a responsive bidder to be
located outside of that area. These
procurements may be accomplished
through informal or formal procurement
procedures, as required by respective
Child Nutrition Program regulations.
The proposed rule provided for
allowing institutions operating the
Child Nutrition Programs to specifically
define geographic areas from which they
will seek to procure unprocessed local
agricultural products. It was proposed
that each institution, whether it be a
school food authority, a child care
institution or an SFSP sponsor,
determine how to define the geographic
area. As indicated previously, 47
comments supported allowing the
purchasing entity to define the local
area in which the geographic preference
option will be applied. No objections to
this provision were received, therefore it
is finalized in this rule as proposed.
One comment specifically
recommended that the ‘‘Buy American’’
provisions of § 210.21 and § 220.16 of
the National School Lunch Program and
School Breakfast Program regulations be
specifically noted in this amendment to
those programs regulations. In response
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
to that comment, the Department
reiterates that all other regulatory
requirements of the Child Nutrition
Programs must be complied with when
implementing the geographic preference
option. When specifying the local area
from which items will be purchased
using the geographic procurement
option, purchasing entities must ensure
that the ‘‘Buy American’’ requirements
of the regulations are complied with and
included in the procurement
specifications. No change, however, has
been made in the regulatory language of
this final rule.
Definition of Unprocessed Agricultural
Products
As provided in the Joint Explanatory
Statement of the Committee of
Conference in House Report 110–627,
the term ‘‘unprocessed’’ precludes the
use of geographic preference in
procuring agricultural products that
have significant value added
components. The Conference report also
noted the acceptability of de minimus
handling and preparation ‘‘such as may
be necessary to present an agricultural
product to a school food authority in a
useable form, such as washing
vegetables, bagging greens, butchering
livestock and poultry, pasteurizing milk,
and putting eggs in a carton.’’
For the purpose of implementing the
geographic preference procurement
option in the Child Nutrition Programs,
the Department proposed a definition of
‘‘unprocessed agricultural products.’’
The guiding principles in developing
the definition were that the definition
should:
(1) Comply with the language and
reflect the intent of the statute;
(2) Ensure that any processing of
agricultural products results in only
minimal value added to such products;
and
(3) Facilitate ease of use of such
products for institutions.
The definition of ‘‘unprocessed
agricultural products’’ included in the
proposed rule specifically prohibited
any processing method that alters the
inherent character of the agricultural
product. To that end, we included in the
proposed definition a list of acceptable
food handling and preservation
techniques for purposes of applying the
geographic preference procurement
option. Such techniques included:
General heat transfer methods such as
cooling, refrigerating and freezing; size
adjustment through size reduction
(peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting and
grinding); drying/dehydration; washing;
vacuum packing and bagging;
pasteurization for milk; the application
of high water pressure (‘‘cold
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
pasteurization’’); butchering of livestock
and poultry and the cleaning of fish.
The Department asserted that these
handling and preservation techniques
both complied with the intent of the
statute and did not alter the inherent
character of agricultural products
subjected to them.
While two commentors supported the
definition as proposed, a number of
comments regarding the food handling
and preservation techniques included in
the definition were received. The
following discussion outlines those
comments by issue and the decisions
made by the Department in response to
the comments in this final rule.
Combination Packages of Vegetables
and Fruits
Fifty comments were received
expressing support for the addition of
combination packages of local, frozen,
bagged vegetables such as zucchini and
summer squash or fresh vegetable roast
packages such as winter squash, turnips
and beets. The commentors indicated
that the ‘‘inherent character’’ of the
vegetables is not being altered in any
way when packaged in such a manner
and fits within the ‘‘de minimus’’
handling and preparation requirements
intended by Congress. In addition, such
packaging conforms with the language
of the statute with regard to presenting
the product in usable form. The
Department agrees with the comments
and, therefore, has revised the definition
of ‘‘unprocessed agricultural products’’
to include such combination packaged
items in this final rule.
Frozen Products
One commentor indicated that frozen
products should be included in the
definition. The proposed rule included
frozen products and the final rule
retains frozen products as acceptable as
a preservation technique. Two
comments were received requesting
that, in order to ensure that flash frozen
products are included in the definition,
the Department specify Individually
Quick Frozen (IQF) as an acceptable
preservation technique. The final rule
retains inclusion of frozen products as
acceptable but the Department does not
wish to include specific techniques for
freezing since technology changes over
time and such specific references to
technique may necessitate future
amendments to the regulation in
response to changes in technology.
Canned and Other Heat Preserved
Products
Three comments were received
requesting that canned products be
included in the definition of
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘unprocessed agricultural products.’’
One commentor wanted to allow
pasteurized cider and pickled products
to be considered ‘‘unprocessed’’ for
purposes of specifying a geographic
preference for procurement. While
canned, pickled and pasteurized
products are acceptable for service in
the Child Nutrition Programs, such
products would not be considered to be
subject to a geographic procurement
preference because heat processing does
not meet the ‘‘de minimus’’ standard of
processing established by Congress as
assessed by the Department. Therefore,
no change in this regulation has been
made in response to these comments.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Formed Products
Fifty comments were received
supporting allowing foods such as
ground beef and other meat patties to be
included in the definition of
‘‘unprocessed agricultural products’’.
Those comments assert that such
products have been handled in a
manner consistent with ‘‘de minimus’’
exceptions in that they are ground then
formed similar to cutting carrots into
sticks or coin shapes. The commentors
indicated that contracting separately for
further processing of ground meat
products which does not change the
inherent character of that product
would be costly and time consuming for
the purchasing entities. Five other
commentors recommended allowing
meat patties made with pure meat and
containing no fillers or additives as
meeting the criteria for geographic
preference procurement. The
Department agrees with these
commentors and has revised the
definition to include formed products
that contain no additives or fillers as
acceptable for purchase using the
geographic preference procurement
option.
Other Products
Forty-one comments were received
recommending that cutting chicken or
other meat into fajita strips and filleting
fish be allowed as acceptable as meeting
the definition of ‘‘unprocessed
agricultural products’’. The Department
wishes to point out that fish filets would
be considered to be ‘‘cleaned’’ and cut,
and slicing products into strips would
be considered to be ‘‘cut’’, both of which
are included in the definition as
proposed. One commentor requested
that ground flour be allowed to be
considered as acceptable. The
Department wishes to clarify that
ground products are allowed and that
the grinding of grain into flour would be
considered to be acceptable as a ground
product subject to the geographic
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
preference procurement option.
Therefore, there is no change to the
definition in response to these
comments.
Preservatives
Forty-six comments were received
requesting clarification as to whether or
not preservatives were allowed in
products subject to the geographic
preference procurement option.
Specifically, they requested clarification
as to whether or not ascorbic acid to
hold color or prevent oxidation once a
fruit or vegetable product was cut or
chopped was acceptable. The
Department agrees that this should be
addressed and has provided for the
addition of ascorbic acid and/or other
preservatives that retain the color of a
product or prevent oxidation to the
definition of ‘‘unprocessed agricultural
products’’. However, no other
preservatives used for any other purpose
are considered to be acceptable.
Packaging
One commentor requested that
portion packaging be explicitly
recognized as meeting the requirements
of the rule. The Department wishes to
point out that packaging is recognized
as allowable with regard to the
definition of ‘‘unprocessed agricultural
products’’. The size of such packaging
included in the procurement
specifications is made at the discretion
of the purchasing entity. Therefore, no
change in response to this comment has
been made in this final rule.
High Water Pressure Cold
Pasteurization
One commentor expressed concern
that the term ‘‘high water pressure cold
pasteurization’’ included in the
definition of ‘‘unprocessed agricultural
product’’ could be interpreted to mean
irradiation. The Department’s intent was
to use this term in the definition to
reference a washing technique. Since
‘‘washing’’ is already included in the
definition of ‘‘unprocessed locally
grown or locally raised agricultural
products’’ and in response to this
comment, the term ‘‘high water pressure
(cold pasteurization)’’ is removed from
the definition.
This final rule prohibits the
application of the geographic preference
procurement option for products
subjected to processing methods not
included in the definition of
‘‘unprocessed agricultural products’’.
This final rule adds new paragraphs
to §§ 210.21, 215.14a, 220.16, 225.17
and 226.22 of Title 7, CFR, to include
the geographic preference procurement
option and define the term
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22605
‘‘unprocessed locally grown or locally
raised agricultural products’’.
Applicability to the Fresh Fruit and
Vegetable Program
The geographic preference
procurement option is applicable to
purchases made in the Fresh Fruit and
Vegetable Program, 42 U.S.C. 1769a
(FFVP). However, this provision shall
only be applied within the context of
the FFVP’s requirement that produce
utilized in the program be fresh. The
definition of ‘‘unprocessed locally
grown or locally raised agricultural
products’’ does not change the basic
statutory requirement that only fresh
produce may be purchased using funds
for the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable
Program. Development of regulations
pertaining to the requirements for the
Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program are
currently in process and the provisions
relating to the geographic preference
procurement option will be included in
that proposed rule, as appropriate.
Executive Order 12866
This rule has been determined to be
not significant and was not reviewed by
the Office Management and Budget in
conformance with Executive Order
12866.
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). It has been certified
that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
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 does not contain
Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) that
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
22606
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
impose costs on State, local, or Tribal
governments or to 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.
Executive Order 12372
The National School Lunch Program
and the School Breakfast Program are
listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under No. 10.555 and
10.553, respectively. The Special Milk
Program is listed under No. 10.556. The
Child and Adult Care Food Program is
listed under No. 10.558 and the Summer
Food Service Program for Children is
listed under No. 10.559. For the reasons
set forth in the final rule in 7 CFR Part
3015, Subpart V and related Notice (48
FR 29115, June 24, 1983), these
programs are included in the scope of
Executive Order 12372, which requires
intergovernmental consultation with
State and local officials.
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.
The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS)
has considered the impact of this rule
on State and local governments and has
determined that this rule does not have
federalism implications. This rule does
not impose substantial or direct
compliance costs on State and local
governments. Therefore, under Section
6(b) of the Executive Order, a federalism
summary impact statement is not
required.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Executive Order 12988
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. This rule is intended to have
preemptive effect with respect to any
State or local laws, regulations or
policies which conflict with its
provisions or which would otherwise
impede its full implementation. This
rule is not intended to have retroactive
effect unless specified in the DATES
section of the final rule. Prior to any
judicial challenge to the provisions of
this rule or the application of its
provisions, all applicable administrative
procedures must be exhausted.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
Civil Rights Impact Analysis
FNS has reviewed this rule in
accordance with Departmental
Regulations 4300–4, ‘‘Civil Rights
Impact Analysis,’’ and 1512–1,
‘‘Regulatory Decision Making
Requirements.’’ After a careful review of
the rule’s intent and provisions, FNS
has determined that this rule is not
intended to limit or reduce in any way
the ability of protected classes of
individuals to receive benefits on the
basis of their race, color, national origin,
sex, age or disability nor is it intended
to have a differential impact on minority
owned or operated business
establishments, and woman- owned or
operated business establishments that
participate in the Child Nutrition
Programs. This rule simply allows
institutions that participate in the Child
Nutrition Programs the option to apply
a geographic preference should such
institutions wish to procure
unprocessed locally grown or locally
raised agricultural products.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. Chap. 35; see 5 CFR part
1320) requires that the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
approve all collections of information
by a Federal agency 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. This rule
does not contain information collection
requirements subject to approval by
OMB under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Food and Nutrition Service is
committed to complying with the EGovernment Act of 2002, 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.
Executive Order 13175
E.O. 13175 requires Federal agencies
to consult and coordinate with Tribes
on a government-to-government basis on
policies that have Tribal implications,
including regulations, legislative
comments or proposed legislation, and
other policy statements or actions that
have substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian Tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
In late 2010 and early 2011, USDA
engaged in a series of consultative
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
sessions to obtain input by Tribal
officials or their designees concerning
the impact of this rule on the Tribe or
Indian Tribal governments, or whether
this rule may preempt Tribal law.
Reports from these consultations will be
made part of the USDA annual reporting
on Tribal Consultation and
Collaboration. USDA will respond in a
timely and meaningful manner to all
Tribal government requests for
consultation concerning this rule and
will provide additional venues, such as
webinars and teleconferences, to
periodically host collaborative
conversations with Tribal officials or
their designees concerning ways to
improve this rule in Indian country.
We are unaware of any current Tribal
laws that could be in conflict with this
final rule.
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 210
Grant programs—education, Grant
programs—health, Infants and children,
Nutrition, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, School
breakfast and lunch programs, Surplus
agricultural commodities.
7 CFR Part 215
Food assistance programs, Grant
programs—education, Grant programs—
health, Infants and children, Milk,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
7 CFR Part 220
Grant programs—education, Grant
programs—health, Infants and children,
Nutrition, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, School breakfast and
lunch programs.
7 CFR Part 225
Food assistance programs, Grant
programs—health, Infants and children,
Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
7 CFR Part 226
Accounting, Aged, Day care, Food
assistance programs, Grant programs,
Grant programs—health, Indians,
Individuals with disabilities, Infants
and children, Intergovernmental
relations, Loan programs, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Surplus
agricultural commodities.
Accordingly, 7 CFR Parts 210, 215,
220, 225, and 226 are amended as
follows:
PART 210—NATIONAL SCHOOL
LUNCH PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
Part 210 continues to read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1751–1760, 1779.
Subpart E—State Agency and School
Food Authority Responsibilities
2. In § 210.21, paragraph (g) is added
to read as follows:
■
§ 210.21
Procurement.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Geographic preference. (1) A
school food authority participating in
the Program, as well as State agencies
making purchases on behalf of such
school food authorities, may apply a
geographic preference when procuring
unprocessed locally grown or locally
raised agricultural products. When
utilizing the geographic preference to
procure such products, the school food
authority making the purchase or the
State agency making purchases on
behalf of such school food authorities
have the discretion to determine the
local area to which the geographic
preference option will be applied;
(2) For the purpose of applying the
optional geographic procurement
preference in paragraph (g)(1) of this
section, ‘‘unprocessed locally grown or
locally raised agricultural products’’
means only those agricultural products
that retain their inherent character. The
effects of the following food handling
and preservation techniques shall not be
considered as changing an agricultural
product into a product of a different
kind or character: Cooling; refrigerating;
freezing; size adjustment made by
peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting,
chopping, shucking, and grinding;
forming ground products into patties
without any additives or fillers; drying/
dehydration; washing; packaging (such
as placing eggs in cartons), vacuum
packing and bagging (such as placing
vegetables in bags or combining two or
more types of vegetables or fruits in a
single package); the addition of ascorbic
acid or other preservatives to prevent
oxidation of produce; butchering
livestock and poultry; cleaning fish; and
the pasteurization of milk.
PART 215—SPECIAL MILK PROGRAM
FOR CHILDREN
3. The authority citation for 7 CFR
Part 215 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1772 and 1779.
4. In § 215.14a, paragraph (e) is added
to read as follows:
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
■
§ 215.14a
Procurement standards.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Geographic preference. A school
food authority participating in the
Program may apply a geographic
preference when procuring milk. When
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
22607
utilizing the geographic preference to
procure milk, the school food authority
making the purchase has the discretion
to determine the local area to which the
geographic preference option will be
applied.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 225—SUMMER FOOD SERVICE
PROGRAM
PART 220—SCHOOL BREAKFAST
PROGRAM
■
5. The authority citation for 7 CFR
Part 220 continues to read as follows:
§ 225.17
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1773, 1779, unless
otherwise noted.
6. In § 220.16, paragraph (f) is added
to read as follows:
■
§ 220.16
Procurement.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Geographic preference. (1) School
food authorities participating in the
Program, as well as State agencies
making purchases on behalf of such
school food authorities, may apply a
geographic preference when procuring
unprocessed locally grown or locally
raised agricultural products. When
utilizing the geographic preference to
procure such products, the school food
authority making the purchase or the
State agency making purchases on
behalf of such school food authorities
have the discretion to determine the
local area to which the geographic
preference option will be applied;
(2) For the purpose of applying the
optional geographic preference in
paragraph (f)(1) of this section,
‘‘unprocessed locally grown or locally
raised agricultural products’’ means only
those agricultural products that retain
their inherent character. The effects of
the following food handling and
preservation techniques shall not be
considered as changing an agricultural
product into a product of a different
kind or character: Cooling; refrigerating;
freezing; size adjustment made by
peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting,
chopping, shucking, and grinding;
forming ground products into patties
without any additives or fillers; drying/
dehydration; washing; packaging (such
as placing eggs in cartons), vacuum
packing and bagging (such as placing
vegetables in bags or combining two or
more types of vegetables or fruits in a
single package); addition of ascorbic
acid or other preservatives to prevent
oxidation of produce; butchering
livestock and poultry; cleaning fish; and
the pasteurization of milk.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
7. The authority citation for 7 CFR
Part 225 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 9, 13 and 14, Richard B.
Russell National School Lunch Act, as
amended, (42 U.S.C. 1758, 1761 and 1762a).
8. In § 225.17, paragraph (e) is added
to read as follows:
Procurement standards.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Geographic preference. (1)
Sponsors participating in the Program
may apply a geographic preference
when procuring unprocessed locally
grown or locally raised agricultural
products. When utilizing the geographic
preference to procure such products, the
sponsor making the purchase has the
discretion to determine the local area to
which the geographic preference option
will be applied;
(2) For the purpose of applying the
optional geographic preference in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section,
‘‘unprocessed locally grown or locally
raised agricultural products’’ means only
those agricultural products that retain
their inherent character. The effects of
the following food handling and
preservation techniques shall not be
considered as changing an agricultural
product into a product of a different
kind or character: Cooling; refrigerating;
freezing; size adjustment made by
peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting,
chopping, shucking, and grinding;
forming ground products into patties
without any additives or fillers; drying/
dehydration; washing; packaging (such
as placing eggs in cartons), vacuum
packing and bagging (such as placing
vegetables in bags or combining two or
more types of vegetables or fruits in a
single package); addition of ascorbic
acid or other preservatives to prevent
oxidation of produce; butchering
livestock and poultry; cleaning fish; and
the pasteurization of milk.
PART 226—CHILD AND ADULT CARE
FOOD PROGRAM
9. The authority citation for 7 CFR
Part 226 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 9, 11, 14, 16, 17, Richard
B. Russell National School Lunch Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 1758, 1759a, 1762a, 1765
and 1766).
10. In § 226.22, paragraph (n) is added
to read as follows:
■
§ 226.22
Procurement standards.
*
*
*
*
*
(n) Geographic preference. (1)
Institutions participating in the Program
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
22608
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
may apply a geographic preference
when procuring unprocessed locally
grown or locally raised agricultural
products. When utilizing the geographic
preference to procure such products, the
institution making the purchase has the
discretion to determine the local area to
which the geographic preference option
will be applied;
(2) For the purpose of applying the
optional geographic preference in
paragraph (n)(1) of this section,
‘‘unprocessed locally grown or locally
raised agricultural products’’ means only
those agricultural products that retain
their inherent character. The effects of
the following food handling and
preservation techniques shall not be
considered as changing an agricultural
product into a product of a different
kind or character: Cooling; refrigerating;
freezing; size adjustment made by
peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting,
chopping, shucking, and grinding;
forming ground products into patties
without any additives or fillers; drying/
dehydration; washing; packaging (such
as placing eggs in cartons), vacuum
packing and bagging (such as placing
vegetables in bags or combining two or
more types of vegetables or fruits in a
single package); addition of ascorbic
acid or other preservatives to prevent
oxidation of produce; butchering
livestock and poultry; cleaning fish; and
the pasteurization of milk.
Dated: April 18, 2011.
Audrey Rowe,
Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–9843 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Business-Cooperative Service
7 CFR Part 4280
Notice of a Public Meeting on the Rural
Energy for America Program
Rural Business-Cooperative
Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of public meeting.
AGENCY:
The Rural BusinessCooperative Service (RBS) will hold two
informational Webinars for the Rural
Energy for America Program (REAP)
associated with the recently published
REAP interim rule and Notice of Funds
Availability (NOFA). Participation will
be limited for each Webinar to the first
two hundred registrants.
DATES: The Webinars will be held on
Friday, April 29, 2011, and on Monday,
May 2, 2011, from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. EDT
both days. You must register, as
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
described in the ADDRESSES section, by
noon EDT April 27, 2011, for the April
29, 2011, Webinar and by noon EDT
April 28, 2011, for the May 2, 2011,
Webinar.
To participate in one of the
Webinars, you must register for one of
the Webinars by sending an e-mail to:
energydivision@wdc.usda.gov. You must
include in the SUBJECT line the date of
the Webinar for which you wish to
participate, and in the body of the
e-mail, please provide the participant’s
name, e-mail address, mailing address,
and telephone number. You must
submit your e-mail by the applicable
deadline listed in the DATES section of
this notice.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donnetta Rigney, Rural BusinessCooperative Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Stop 3225, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–3221,
Telephone: (202) 720–9812.
The REAP
interim rule and the NOFA were
published in the Federal Register on
April 14, 2011. In order to familarize the
public with the content of the REAP
interim rule, representatives of the
Department of Agriculture are
conducting the two Webinars. The
purpose of these Webinars is to provide
information on the interim rule for the
Rural Energy for America Program,
focusing on the provisions associated
with flexible fuel pumps and other
significant changes being implemented
through the interim rule. Participants
will be afforded the opportunity to ask
questions on the material included in
the presentation.
Please note that formal comments on
the interim rule will not be accepted
during the Webinar. Instead, the public
has an opportunity to comment formally
on the interim rule as provided in the
interim rule published in the Federal
Register on April 14, 2011 (76 FR
21110).
All prospective registrants will be
notified by the Agency via e-mail if they
are or are not among the first two
hundred registrants for one of the two
Webinars.
Participants are responsible for
ensuring their systems are compatible
with the Webinar software.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: April 18, 2011.
Judith A. Canales,
Administrator, Rural Business-Cooperative
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–9725 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–XY–P
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 1610
[CPSC Docket No. CPSC–2010–0086]
Third Party Testing for Certain
Children’s Products; Clothing Textiles:
Revisions to Terms of Acceptance of
Children’s Product Certifications
Based on Third Party Conformity
Assessment Body Testing Prior to
Commission’s Acceptance of
Accreditation
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of requirements; revision
of retrospective testing terms.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission (‘‘CPSC,’’
‘‘Commission,’’ or ‘‘we’’) issues this
notice amending the terms under which
it will accept certifications for
children’s products based on third party
conformity assessment body (laboratory)
testing to the flammability regulations at
16 CFR part 1610 that occurred before
the Commission’s acceptance of the
accreditation of the third party
conformity assessment body.1 We are
taking this action in response to a
request from certain members of the
clothing textile industry to reduce
unnecessary retesting of clothing
textiles that have been tested already
and found to be in compliance with
CPSC regulations.
DATES: Effective Date: The revision
announced in this document is effective
April 22, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert ‘‘Jay’’ Howell, Assistant Executive
Director for the Office of Hazard
Identification and Reduction, U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission,
4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD
20814; e-mail: rhowell@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Background
Section 14(a)(3)(B)(vi) of the CPSA, as
added by section 102(a)(2) of the
Consumer Product Safety Improvement
Act of 2008 (CPSIA), Public Law 110–
314, directs the CPSC to publish a
notice of requirements for accreditation
of third party conformity assessment
bodies to assess children’s products for
conformity with ‘‘other children’s
product safety rules.’’ Section 14(f)(1) of
1 The Commission voted 4–0–1 to publish this
revision to the notice of requirements for clothing
textiles. Commissioners Nancy A. Nord and Anne
M. Northup each issued a statement, and the
statements can be found at https://www.cpsc.gov/pr/
statements.html.
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 78 (Friday, April 22, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22603-22608]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9843]
========================================================================
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. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 22603]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
7 CFR Parts 210, 215, 220, 225, and 226
RIN 0584-AE03
Geographic Preference Option for the Procurement of Unprocessed
Agricultural Products in Child Nutrition Programs
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The 2008 Farm Bill amended the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act to direct that the Secretary of Agriculture encourage
institutions operating Child Nutrition Programs to purchase unprocessed
locally grown and locally raised agricultural products. Effective
October 1, 2008, institutions receiving funds through the Child
Nutrition Programs may apply an optional geographic preference in the
procurement of unprocessed locally grown or locally raised agricultural
products. This provision applies to institutions in all of the Child
Nutrition Programs, including the National School Lunch Program, School
Breakfast Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Special Milk
Program for Children, Child and Adult Care Food Program and Summer Food
Service Program, as well as to purchases made for these programs by the
Department of Defense Fresh Program. The provision also applies to
State agencies making purchases on behalf of any of the aforementioned
Child Nutrition Programs. The purpose of this rule is to finalize the
geographic preference option in Child Nutrition Programs.
DATES: This rule is effective May 23, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Brewer, Chief, Policy and
Program Development Branch, Child Nutrition Division, Food and
Nutrition Service, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia 22302,
or by telephone at (703) 305-2590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4302 of Public Law 110-246, the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008, amended section 9(j) of the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758(j)) to require the Secretary
of Agriculture to encourage institutions operating Child Nutrition
Programs to purchase unprocessed locally grown and locally raised
agricultural products. Pursuant to section 4407 of Public Law 110-246,
beginning October 1, 2008, institutions receiving funds as participants
in the Child Nutrition Programs may apply an optional geographic
preference in the procurement of unprocessed locally grown or locally
raised agricultural products. This provision applies to institutions
operating all of the Child Nutrition Programs, including the National
School Lunch Program, School Breakfast Program, Fresh Fruit and
Vegetable Program, Special Milk Program, Child and Adult Care Food
Program and Summer Food Service Program, as well as to purchases made
for these programs by the Department of Defense Fresh Program. The
provision does not apply to purchases made by the Department. However,
the provision does also apply to State agencies making purchases on
behalf of any of the aforementioned Child Nutrition Programs. The
provisions were initially implemented through policy memoranda and
explanatory question and answer communications dated January 9, 2009,
July 22, 2009, and October 9, 2009.
The Department published a proposed rule on April 19, 2010, at 75
FR 20316 to solicit comments on the incorporation of this procurement
option in Child Nutrition Program regulations. The rule also served to
define the term ``unprocessed locally grown or locally raised
agricultural products'' to ensure that both the intent of Congress in
providing for such a procurement option was met and that any such
definition would facilitate ease of implementation for institutions
participating in the Child Nutrition Programs. The comment period ended
on June 18, 2010. The Department received 77 comments on the proposed
rule. The following discussion provides information on the comments as
well as a discussion of the clarifications and changes made to the
proposal based on the comments received.
General Comments
In general, the comments received by the Department were very
supportive of the regulation as proposed. Fifty-eight comments
commended the Department for clarifying previous interpretations of the
geographic preference option for procurement. Forty-four commentors
stated that they believed the updated language of the rule more closely
complied with the Congressional Conference Report language that
indicated that there is no intent to preclude ``de minimus handling and
preparation such as necessary to present an agricultural product to a
school food authority in a useable form.'' Forty-seven comments
supported the provision of the rule allowing the purchasing entity,
such as local school food authorities, to determine the local area to
which a geographic preference will be applied, indicating that they
agreed with the Department's view that individual circumstances and
product availability leads to the most successful local and regional
procurement programs.
Procurement Issues
As indicated in the proposed rule, traditionally, a geographic
preference established for procurements provides bidders located in a
specified geographic area additional points or credit calculated during
the evaluation of the proposals or bids received in response to a
solicitation. A geographic preference is not a procurement set-aside
for bidders located in the specified geographic area, guaranteeing them
a certain level or percentage of business. In addition, including a
geographic preference in a procurement does not preclude a bidder from
outside the specified geographic area from competing for, and possibly
being awarded, the contract subject to the geographic preference.
Rather, a geographic preference is a tool that gives bidders in a
specified geographic area a specific, defined advantage in the
procurement process. We received a number of comments specifically
[[Page 22604]]
requesting guidance on how to apply the geographic preference option in
procurement specifications and procedures as well as questions on
procurement processes in general. The Department published a policy
memorandum for program cooperators on general procurement and
geographic preference issues on February 1, 2011 and will be publishing
additional guidance on procurement provisions associated with
implementation of the geographic preference option included in this
final rule as needed. Therefore, no changes have been made to the
procurement-specific provisions included in the proposed rule and those
procurement provisions are finalized as proposed.
Geographic Area
By utilizing the statutorily established geographic preference
option in Child Nutrition Programs, purchasing institutions, such as
States, school food authorities, child care institutions and Summer
Food Service Program (SFSP) sponsors, may specifically identify the
geographic area within which unprocessed locally raised and locally
grown agricultural products will originate. As indicated in the
proposed rule, a responsive bidder would offer to provide unprocessed
locally raised and locally grown agricultural products from the
specifically identified geographic area. In most cases, we would expect
that a bidder would be located in the identified geographic area,
though it is possible for a responsive bidder to be located outside of
that area. These procurements may be accomplished through informal or
formal procurement procedures, as required by respective Child
Nutrition Program regulations.
The proposed rule provided for allowing institutions operating the
Child Nutrition Programs to specifically define geographic areas from
which they will seek to procure unprocessed local agricultural
products. It was proposed that each institution, whether it be a school
food authority, a child care institution or an SFSP sponsor, determine
how to define the geographic area. As indicated previously, 47 comments
supported allowing the purchasing entity to define the local area in
which the geographic preference option will be applied. No objections
to this provision were received, therefore it is finalized in this rule
as proposed.
One comment specifically recommended that the ``Buy American''
provisions of Sec. 210.21 and Sec. 220.16 of the National School
Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program regulations be specifically
noted in this amendment to those programs regulations. In response to
that comment, the Department reiterates that all other regulatory
requirements of the Child Nutrition Programs must be complied with when
implementing the geographic preference option. When specifying the
local area from which items will be purchased using the geographic
procurement option, purchasing entities must ensure that the ``Buy
American'' requirements of the regulations are complied with and
included in the procurement specifications. No change, however, has
been made in the regulatory language of this final rule.
Definition of Unprocessed Agricultural Products
As provided in the Joint Explanatory Statement of the Committee of
Conference in House Report 110-627, the term ``unprocessed'' precludes
the use of geographic preference in procuring agricultural products
that have significant value added components. The Conference report
also noted the acceptability of de minimus handling and preparation
``such as may be necessary to present an agricultural product to a
school food authority in a useable form, such as washing vegetables,
bagging greens, butchering livestock and poultry, pasteurizing milk,
and putting eggs in a carton.''
For the purpose of implementing the geographic preference
procurement option in the Child Nutrition Programs, the Department
proposed a definition of ``unprocessed agricultural products.'' The
guiding principles in developing the definition were that the
definition should:
(1) Comply with the language and reflect the intent of the statute;
(2) Ensure that any processing of agricultural products results in
only minimal value added to such products; and
(3) Facilitate ease of use of such products for institutions.
The definition of ``unprocessed agricultural products'' included in
the proposed rule specifically prohibited any processing method that
alters the inherent character of the agricultural product. To that end,
we included in the proposed definition a list of acceptable food
handling and preservation techniques for purposes of applying the
geographic preference procurement option. Such techniques included:
General heat transfer methods such as cooling, refrigerating and
freezing; size adjustment through size reduction (peeling, slicing,
dicing, cutting and grinding); drying/dehydration; washing; vacuum
packing and bagging; pasteurization for milk; the application of high
water pressure (``cold pasteurization''); butchering of livestock and
poultry and the cleaning of fish. The Department asserted that these
handling and preservation techniques both complied with the intent of
the statute and did not alter the inherent character of agricultural
products subjected to them.
While two commentors supported the definition as proposed, a number
of comments regarding the food handling and preservation techniques
included in the definition were received. The following discussion
outlines those comments by issue and the decisions made by the
Department in response to the comments in this final rule.
Combination Packages of Vegetables and Fruits
Fifty comments were received expressing support for the addition of
combination packages of local, frozen, bagged vegetables such as
zucchini and summer squash or fresh vegetable roast packages such as
winter squash, turnips and beets. The commentors indicated that the
``inherent character'' of the vegetables is not being altered in any
way when packaged in such a manner and fits within the ``de minimus''
handling and preparation requirements intended by Congress. In
addition, such packaging conforms with the language of the statute with
regard to presenting the product in usable form. The Department agrees
with the comments and, therefore, has revised the definition of
``unprocessed agricultural products'' to include such combination
packaged items in this final rule.
Frozen Products
One commentor indicated that frozen products should be included in
the definition. The proposed rule included frozen products and the
final rule retains frozen products as acceptable as a preservation
technique. Two comments were received requesting that, in order to
ensure that flash frozen products are included in the definition, the
Department specify Individually Quick Frozen (IQF) as an acceptable
preservation technique. The final rule retains inclusion of frozen
products as acceptable but the Department does not wish to include
specific techniques for freezing since technology changes over time and
such specific references to technique may necessitate future amendments
to the regulation in response to changes in technology.
Canned and Other Heat Preserved Products
Three comments were received requesting that canned products be
included in the definition of
[[Page 22605]]
``unprocessed agricultural products.'' One commentor wanted to allow
pasteurized cider and pickled products to be considered ``unprocessed''
for purposes of specifying a geographic preference for procurement.
While canned, pickled and pasteurized products are acceptable for
service in the Child Nutrition Programs, such products would not be
considered to be subject to a geographic procurement preference because
heat processing does not meet the ``de minimus'' standard of processing
established by Congress as assessed by the Department. Therefore, no
change in this regulation has been made in response to these comments.
Formed Products
Fifty comments were received supporting allowing foods such as
ground beef and other meat patties to be included in the definition of
``unprocessed agricultural products''. Those comments assert that such
products have been handled in a manner consistent with ``de minimus''
exceptions in that they are ground then formed similar to cutting
carrots into sticks or coin shapes. The commentors indicated that
contracting separately for further processing of ground meat products
which does not change the inherent character of that product would be
costly and time consuming for the purchasing entities. Five other
commentors recommended allowing meat patties made with pure meat and
containing no fillers or additives as meeting the criteria for
geographic preference procurement. The Department agrees with these
commentors and has revised the definition to include formed products
that contain no additives or fillers as acceptable for purchase using
the geographic preference procurement option.
Other Products
Forty-one comments were received recommending that cutting chicken
or other meat into fajita strips and filleting fish be allowed as
acceptable as meeting the definition of ``unprocessed agricultural
products''. The Department wishes to point out that fish filets would
be considered to be ``cleaned'' and cut, and slicing products into
strips would be considered to be ``cut'', both of which are included in
the definition as proposed. One commentor requested that ground flour
be allowed to be considered as acceptable. The Department wishes to
clarify that ground products are allowed and that the grinding of grain
into flour would be considered to be acceptable as a ground product
subject to the geographic preference procurement option. Therefore,
there is no change to the definition in response to these comments.
Preservatives
Forty-six comments were received requesting clarification as to
whether or not preservatives were allowed in products subject to the
geographic preference procurement option. Specifically, they requested
clarification as to whether or not ascorbic acid to hold color or
prevent oxidation once a fruit or vegetable product was cut or chopped
was acceptable. The Department agrees that this should be addressed and
has provided for the addition of ascorbic acid and/or other
preservatives that retain the color of a product or prevent oxidation
to the definition of ``unprocessed agricultural products''. However, no
other preservatives used for any other purpose are considered to be
acceptable.
Packaging
One commentor requested that portion packaging be explicitly
recognized as meeting the requirements of the rule. The Department
wishes to point out that packaging is recognized as allowable with
regard to the definition of ``unprocessed agricultural products''. The
size of such packaging included in the procurement specifications is
made at the discretion of the purchasing entity. Therefore, no change
in response to this comment has been made in this final rule.
High Water Pressure Cold Pasteurization
One commentor expressed concern that the term ``high water pressure
cold pasteurization'' included in the definition of ``unprocessed
agricultural product'' could be interpreted to mean irradiation. The
Department's intent was to use this term in the definition to reference
a washing technique. Since ``washing'' is already included in the
definition of ``unprocessed locally grown or locally raised
agricultural products'' and in response to this comment, the term
``high water pressure (cold pasteurization)'' is removed from the
definition.
This final rule prohibits the application of the geographic
preference procurement option for products subjected to processing
methods not included in the definition of ``unprocessed agricultural
products''.
This final rule adds new paragraphs to Sec. Sec. 210.21, 215.14a,
220.16, 225.17 and 226.22 of Title 7, CFR, to include the geographic
preference procurement option and define the term ``unprocessed locally
grown or locally raised agricultural products''.
Applicability to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program
The geographic preference procurement option is applicable to
purchases made in the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, 42 U.S.C.
1769a (FFVP). However, this provision shall only be applied within the
context of the FFVP's requirement that produce utilized in the program
be fresh. The definition of ``unprocessed locally grown or locally
raised agricultural products'' does not change the basic statutory
requirement that only fresh produce may be purchased using funds for
the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program. Development of regulations
pertaining to the requirements for the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable
Program are currently in process and the provisions relating to the
geographic preference procurement option will be included in that
proposed rule, as appropriate.
Executive Order 12866
This rule has been determined to be not significant and was not
reviewed by the Office Management and Budget in conformance with
Executive Order 12866.
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). It has been
certified that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
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 does
not contain Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of Title
II of the UMRA) that
[[Page 22606]]
impose costs on State, local, or Tribal governments or to 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.
Executive Order 12372
The National School Lunch Program and the School Breakfast Program
are listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No.
10.555 and 10.553, respectively. The Special Milk Program is listed
under No. 10.556. The Child and Adult Care Food Program is listed under
No. 10.558 and the Summer Food Service Program for Children is listed
under No. 10.559. For the reasons set forth in the final rule in 7 CFR
Part 3015, Subpart V and related Notice (48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983),
these programs are included in the scope of Executive Order 12372,
which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local
officials.
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. The
Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) has considered the impact of this rule
on State and local governments and has determined that this rule does
not have federalism implications. This rule does not impose substantial
or direct compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore,
under Section 6(b) of the Executive Order, a federalism summary impact
statement is not required.
Executive Order 12988
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule is intended to have preemptive effect with
respect to any State or local laws, regulations or policies which
conflict with its provisions or which would otherwise impede its full
implementation. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect
unless specified in the DATES section of the final rule. Prior to any
judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule or the application of
its provisions, all applicable administrative procedures must be
exhausted.
Civil Rights Impact Analysis
FNS has reviewed this rule in accordance with Departmental
Regulations 4300-4, ``Civil Rights Impact Analysis,'' and 1512-1,
``Regulatory Decision Making Requirements.'' After a careful review of
the rule's intent and provisions, FNS has determined that this rule is
not intended to limit or reduce in any way the ability of protected
classes of individuals to receive benefits on the basis of their race,
color, national origin, sex, age or disability nor is it intended to
have a differential impact on minority owned or operated business
establishments, and woman- owned or operated business establishments
that participate in the Child Nutrition Programs. This rule simply
allows institutions that participate in the Child Nutrition Programs
the option to apply a geographic preference should such institutions
wish to procure unprocessed locally grown or locally raised
agricultural products.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chap. 35; see 5 CFR
part 1320) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
approve all collections of information by a Federal agency 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. This rule does not contain information collection
requirements subject to approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Food and Nutrition Service is committed to complying with the
E-Government Act of 2002, 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.
Executive Order 13175
E.O. 13175 requires Federal agencies to consult and coordinate with
Tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies that have Tribal
implications, including regulations, legislative comments or proposed
legislation, and other policy statements or actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes. In late 2010 and early 2011, USDA engaged
in a series of consultative sessions to obtain input by Tribal
officials or their designees concerning the impact of this rule on the
Tribe or Indian Tribal governments, or whether this rule may preempt
Tribal law. Reports from these consultations will be made part of the
USDA annual reporting on Tribal Consultation and Collaboration. USDA
will respond in a timely and meaningful manner to all Tribal government
requests for consultation concerning this rule and will provide
additional venues, such as webinars and teleconferences, to
periodically host collaborative conversations with Tribal officials or
their designees concerning ways to improve this rule in Indian country.
We are unaware of any current Tribal laws that could be in conflict
with this final rule.
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 210
Grant programs--education, Grant programs--health, Infants and
children, Nutrition, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, School breakfast and lunch programs, Surplus agricultural
commodities.
7 CFR Part 215
Food assistance programs, Grant programs--education, Grant
programs--health, Infants and children, Milk, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
7 CFR Part 220
Grant programs--education, Grant programs--health, Infants and
children, Nutrition, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, School
breakfast and lunch programs.
7 CFR Part 225
Food assistance programs, Grant programs--health, Infants and
children, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
7 CFR Part 226
Accounting, Aged, Day care, Food assistance programs, Grant
programs, Grant programs--health, Indians, Individuals with
disabilities, Infants and children, Intergovernmental relations, Loan
programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surplus
agricultural commodities.
Accordingly, 7 CFR Parts 210, 215, 220, 225, and 226 are amended as
follows:
PART 210--NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR Part 210 continues to read as
follows:
[[Page 22607]]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1751-1760, 1779.
Subpart E--State Agency and School Food Authority Responsibilities
0
2. In Sec. 210.21, paragraph (g) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 210.21 Procurement.
* * * * *
(g) Geographic preference. (1) A school food authority
participating in the Program, as well as State agencies making
purchases on behalf of such school food authorities, may apply a
geographic preference when procuring unprocessed locally grown or
locally raised agricultural products. When utilizing the geographic
preference to procure such products, the school food authority making
the purchase or the State agency making purchases on behalf of such
school food authorities have the discretion to determine the local area
to which the geographic preference option will be applied;
(2) For the purpose of applying the optional geographic procurement
preference in paragraph (g)(1) of this section, ``unprocessed locally
grown or locally raised agricultural products'' means only those
agricultural products that retain their inherent character. The effects
of the following food handling and preservation techniques shall not be
considered as changing an agricultural product into a product of a
different kind or character: Cooling; refrigerating; freezing; size
adjustment made by peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting, chopping,
shucking, and grinding; forming ground products into patties without
any additives or fillers; drying/dehydration; washing; packaging (such
as placing eggs in cartons), vacuum packing and bagging (such as
placing vegetables in bags or combining two or more types of vegetables
or fruits in a single package); the addition of ascorbic acid or other
preservatives to prevent oxidation of produce; butchering livestock and
poultry; cleaning fish; and the pasteurization of milk.
PART 215--SPECIAL MILK PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN
0
3. The authority citation for 7 CFR Part 215 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1772 and 1779.
0
4. In Sec. 215.14a, paragraph (e) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 215.14a Procurement standards.
* * * * *
(e) Geographic preference. A school food authority participating in
the Program may apply a geographic preference when procuring milk. When
utilizing the geographic preference to procure milk, the school food
authority making the purchase has the discretion to determine the local
area to which the geographic preference option will be applied.
* * * * *
PART 220--SCHOOL BREAKFAST PROGRAM
0
5. The authority citation for 7 CFR Part 220 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1773, 1779, unless otherwise noted.
0
6. In Sec. 220.16, paragraph (f) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 220.16 Procurement.
* * * * *
(f) Geographic preference. (1) School food authorities
participating in the Program, as well as State agencies making
purchases on behalf of such school food authorities, may apply a
geographic preference when procuring unprocessed locally grown or
locally raised agricultural products. When utilizing the geographic
preference to procure such products, the school food authority making
the purchase or the State agency making purchases on behalf of such
school food authorities have the discretion to determine the local area
to which the geographic preference option will be applied;
(2) For the purpose of applying the optional geographic preference
in paragraph (f)(1) of this section, ``unprocessed locally grown or
locally raised agricultural products'' means only those agricultural
products that retain their inherent character. The effects of the
following food handling and preservation techniques shall not be
considered as changing an agricultural product into a product of a
different kind or character: Cooling; refrigerating; freezing; size
adjustment made by peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting, chopping,
shucking, and grinding; forming ground products into patties without
any additives or fillers; drying/dehydration; washing; packaging (such
as placing eggs in cartons), vacuum packing and bagging (such as
placing vegetables in bags or combining two or more types of vegetables
or fruits in a single package); addition of ascorbic acid or other
preservatives to prevent oxidation of produce; butchering livestock and
poultry; cleaning fish; and the pasteurization of milk.
* * * * *
PART 225--SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM
0
7. The authority citation for 7 CFR Part 225 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 9, 13 and 14, Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 1758, 1761 and 1762a).
0
8. In Sec. 225.17, paragraph (e) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 225.17 Procurement standards.
* * * * *
(e) Geographic preference. (1) Sponsors participating in the
Program may apply a geographic preference when procuring unprocessed
locally grown or locally raised agricultural products. When utilizing
the geographic preference to procure such products, the sponsor making
the purchase has the discretion to determine the local area to which
the geographic preference option will be applied;
(2) For the purpose of applying the optional geographic preference
in paragraph (e)(1) of this section, ``unprocessed locally grown or
locally raised agricultural products'' means only those agricultural
products that retain their inherent character. The effects of the
following food handling and preservation techniques shall not be
considered as changing an agricultural product into a product of a
different kind or character: Cooling; refrigerating; freezing; size
adjustment made by peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting, chopping,
shucking, and grinding; forming ground products into patties without
any additives or fillers; drying/dehydration; washing; packaging (such
as placing eggs in cartons), vacuum packing and bagging (such as
placing vegetables in bags or combining two or more types of vegetables
or fruits in a single package); addition of ascorbic acid or other
preservatives to prevent oxidation of produce; butchering livestock and
poultry; cleaning fish; and the pasteurization of milk.
PART 226--CHILD AND ADULT CARE FOOD PROGRAM
0
9. The authority citation for 7 CFR Part 226 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 9, 11, 14, 16, 17, Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1758, 1759a, 1762a, 1765 and
1766).
0
10. In Sec. 226.22, paragraph (n) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 226.22 Procurement standards.
* * * * *
(n) Geographic preference. (1) Institutions participating in the
Program
[[Page 22608]]
may apply a geographic preference when procuring unprocessed locally
grown or locally raised agricultural products. When utilizing the
geographic preference to procure such products, the institution making
the purchase has the discretion to determine the local area to which
the geographic preference option will be applied;
(2) For the purpose of applying the optional geographic preference
in paragraph (n)(1) of this section, ``unprocessed locally grown or
locally raised agricultural products'' means only those agricultural
products that retain their inherent character. The effects of the
following food handling and preservation techniques shall not be
considered as changing an agricultural product into a product of a
different kind or character: Cooling; refrigerating; freezing; size
adjustment made by peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting, chopping,
shucking, and grinding; forming ground products into patties without
any additives or fillers; drying/dehydration; washing; packaging (such
as placing eggs in cartons), vacuum packing and bagging (such as
placing vegetables in bags or combining two or more types of vegetables
or fruits in a single package); addition of ascorbic acid or other
preservatives to prevent oxidation of produce; butchering livestock and
poultry; cleaning fish; and the pasteurization of milk.
Dated: April 18, 2011.
Audrey Rowe,
Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-9843 Filed 4-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P