Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request-Impact of Implementation of the Affordable Care Act on SNAP Operations and Participation, 15929-15931 [2013-05781]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 13, 2013 / Notices all appointments to the advisory committee. To ensure that the recommendations of the FRAC have taken into account the needs of diverse groups served by the Department, membership will, to the extent practicable, include individuals with demonstrated ability to represent minorities, women, and persons with disabilities. Dated: February 20, 2012. Gregory Parham, Acting Assistant Secretary for Administration. [FR Doc. 2013–05739 Filed 3–12–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–11–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Research Service Robert Griesbach, Assistant Administrator. Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive License AGENCY: [FR Doc. 2013–05764 Filed 3–12–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–03–P Agricultural Research Service, USDA. ACTION: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Notice of intent. Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, intends to grant to Lysando AG of Triesenberg, Liechtenstein, an exclusive license to U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 12/ 470,321, ‘‘LAMBDASA2 ENDOLYSIN TRUNCATION’’, filed on May 21, 2009; U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 12/ 874,138, ‘‘BACTERIOPHAGE LYTIC ENZYMES AS ALTERNATIVE ANTIMICROBIALS’’, filed on September 1, 2010; U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 12/460,812, ‘‘TRIPLE ACTING ANTIMICROBIALS THAT ARE REFRACTORY TO RESISTANCE DEVELOPMENT’’, filed on July 24, 2009; and U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 12/784,675, ‘‘FUSION OF PEPTIDOGLYCAN HYDROLASE ENZYMES TO A PROTEIN TRANSDUCTION DOMAIN ALLOWS ERADICATION OF BOTH EXTRACELLULAR AND INTRACELLULAR GRAM POSITIVE’’, filed on July 24, 2009. DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 12, 2013. ADDRESSES: Send comments to: USDA, ARS, Office of Technology Transfer, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Rm. 4–1174, Beltsville, Maryland 20705–5131. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: June Blalock of the Office of Technology Transfer at the Beltsville address given above; telephone: 301–504–5989. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Government’s patent rights in these inventions are assigned to the SUMMARY: mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES United States of America, as represented by the Secretary of Agriculture. It is in the public interest to so license these inventions as Lysando AG of Triesenberg, Liechtenstein has submitted a complete and sufficient application for a license. The prospective exclusive license will be royalty-bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within thirty (30) days from the date of this published Notice, the Agricultural Research Service receives written evidence and argument which establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Mar 12, 2013 Jkt 229001 Food and Nutrition Service Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request—Impact of Implementation of the Affordable Care Act on SNAP Operations and Participation Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice invites the general public and other public agencies to comment on this proposed information collection. This is a new collection for research on the impact of implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) on the operations of, and participation in, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 13, 2013. ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions that were used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 15929 collection of information on those who are to respond, including use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to: Steven Carlson, Office of Research and Analysis, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 3101 Park Center Drive, Room 1014, Alexandria, VA 22302. Comments may also be submitted via fax to the attention of Steven Carlson at 703–305–2576 or via email to Steve.Carlson@fns.usda.gov. Comments will also be accepted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments electronically. All written comments will be open for public inspection at the office of the Food and Nutrition Service during regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday) at 3101 Park Center Drive, Room 1014, Alexandria, Virginia 22302. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will be a matter of public record. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of this information collection should be directed to Steven Carlson at 703–305–2017. Information requests submitted through email should refer to the title of this proposed collection and/ or the OMB approval number in the subject line. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: Impact of Implementation of the Affordable Care Act on SNAP Operations and Participation. OMB Number: 0584—NEW. Expiration Date: Not Yet Determined. Type of Request: New Collection. Abstract: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the USDA’s largest nutrition program, helping over 46 million low-income Americans (in fiscal year 2012) to purchase food. The program, administered by the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), is designed to respond to broad economic and individual circumstances as they change over time. The program’s operating environment will be influenced importantly by the implementation of the ACA. This study will assess the impact of ACA implementation on participation in the SNAP among nonelderly nondisabled adults, ages 19–64. This issue has major significance not only in its implications for Federal and State E:\FR\FM\13MRN1.SGM 13MRN1 15930 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 13, 2013 / Notices budgets, but also more generally for the economic well-being of America’s adult workers and their families. ACA implementation could potentially have a profound impact on SNAP participation among nonelderly nondisabled adults 19 to 64 in many ways, including: • Increase the number of nonelderly nondisabled adults that will newly apply for health coverage, including many who qualify for SNAP but do not participate. This could lead to a substantial increase in SNAP participation, even in States that do not implement the expanded Medicaid limits for income eligibility and retain their pre-ACA Medicaid eligibility standards. • ACA’s investment of Federal resources for improving eligibility information technology (IT) can be used to improve systems that Medicaid shares with SNAP. • When people apply for SNAP and Medicaid benefits, caseworkers may draw from ACA’s data-gathering mechanisms to reduce the work required to determine SNAP eligibility. • Enrollment and retention under ACA departs from traditional methods used by public benefit programs. Among the major potential changes to be implemented in Medicaid are: the opportunity to enroll and renew remotely; verification through data matches; and renewing one’s eligibility based on data matches, without required client action. These new approaches may inspire similar innovations with SNAP eligibility determination. • In a State where Medicaid and SNAP use different eligibility systems, if Medicaid’s system modernizes and SNAP’s does not, SNAP will need to assume a larger share of spending to maintain and operate its eligibility system. Also, major changes in Medicaid eligibility could lead some States to move Medicaid outside the core responsibilities of social service agencies. If this happens, applicants may need to provide the same information multiple times to qualify for multiple programs, rather than once. • Some States may use SNAP eligibility information to qualify uninsured adults and children for Medicaid. In States where Medicaid and SNAP use different eligibility systems, such an initiative could allow the IT work needed to connect the two systems to qualify for the Medicaid 90/10 match. • States will need to rethink the integration of policies and models across benefits programs in light of the changes to Medicaid eligibility under ACA. The potential for growth in SNAP participation varies substantially among States, in both absolute numbers and as percentages of current State-by-State SNAP caseloads. FNS has undertaken this study to better anticipate and measure these effects, through a combination of qualitative and quantitative research consisting of rigorous case studies in selected States and analyses of emerging national survey datasets. In each of the six study sites, the study seeks to describe and determine (1) the coordination of SNAP and Medicaid enrollment and renewal processes in the State and whether any changes came about with the ACA; (2) the process for directing Medicaid applicants to SNAP; and (3) the impact of ACA implementation on the number of SNAP applications. The study includes a quantitative research component involving the use of administrative data in six States and a qualitative research component involving on-site staff interviews in six study sites. We will also undertake a detailed ‘‘process mapping’’ of the extent to which applicants for Medicaid enrollment or renewal are channeled toward SNAP enrollment or renewal (or vice versa). Our proposed quantitative approach relies on the analysis of caselevel data extracted from State administrative datasets, in addition to State-provided counts and tabulations from their administrative data. At each of the six sites, hour-long semistructured interviews will be conducted mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Survey instrument SNAP administrators and staff ..... Medicaid administrators and staff Community-level stakeholders ..... Total Reporting Burden ......... Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 There are 14 total types of respondents. Respondent groups identified include: • Six State and local SNAP administrators and staff: State program director, assistant director for policy, assistant director for operations (including call center operations), local program director, case manager (initial enrollments) and case manager (renewals); • Six State and local Medicaid administrators and staff: State program director, assistant director for policy, assistant director for operations, local program director, case manager (initial enrollments) and case manager (renewals); and • Two community-level stakeholders: SNAP-focused Community Based Organization (CBO) representative and Medicaid-focused CBO representative. Estimated Number of Respondents: The total estimated number of respondents is 84. This includes: (a) 36 State and local SNAP administrators and staff; (b) 36 State and local Medicaid administrators and staff; and (c) 12 community-level stakeholders. Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: Each respondent will be asked to participate in two in-person interviews—one interview in Year 2 of the project and a follow-up interview in Year 3 of the project. Estimated Total Annual Responses: 84. Estimated Time per Response: 60 minutes. Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 10,080 minutes (168 hours). See the table below for estimated total annual burden for each type of respondent. Total number of responses per respondent Estimated total annual responses Estimated avg. number of hours per response 36 36 12 84 2 2 2 2 72 72 24 168 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Interview .................................... Interview .................................... Interview .................................... .................................................... 17:11 Mar 12, 2013 Affected State, Local and Not-for-Profit Institutions Estimated number of respondents Type of respondent VerDate Mar<15>2010 with State and local SNAP and Medicaid administrators, SNAP and Medicaid caseworkers and directors of community-based organizations involved with integrating the SNAP and Medicaid programs. Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13MRN1.SGM 13MRN1 Estimated total hours 72 72 24 168 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 13, 2013 / Notices Dated: March 4, 2013. Audrey Rowe, Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service. [FR Doc. 2013–05781 Filed 3–12–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–30–P CHEMICAL SAFETY AND HAZARD INVESTIGATION BOARD Sunshine Act Meeting; Request for Comments on Draft Evaluation of Recommended Practice on Fatigue Risk Management Systems for Personnel in the Refining and Petrochemical Industries TIME AND DATE: April 24, 2013; 9:30 a.m. EDT. Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, Horizon Room, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. STATUS: Open to the public. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) will convene a public meeting on Wednesday, April 24, 2013, starting at 9:30 a.m. EDT at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, Horizon Room, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. At the meeting, CSB will consider and vote on the status of Recommendation No. 2005–04–I–TX– 7 issued to the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the United Steelworkers International Union (USW) in March 2007. This recommendation urged API and USW to jointly lead the development of an ANSI consensus standard with guidelines for fatigue prevention. The CSB based this recommendation on its investigation of explosions and fires that occurred at BP’s Texas City Refinery on March 23, 2005. In addition the Board intends to consider status designations for the following recommendations to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration: 2001–05–I–DE–1 (Process Safety Management coverage of atmospheric storage tanks); 2005–04–I– TX–9 (Process Safety Management requirement for organizational management of change reviews); 2010– 07–I–CT–1 (Regulations addressing fuel gas safety). Subject to the call of the chairperson, the Board may consider other recommendations-related items that have been calendared for consideration at a public meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 23, 2005, explosions and fires in an isomerization unit (ISOM) at BP’s Texas City Refinery caused 15 deaths, 180 injuries, and significant economic mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES PLACE: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Mar 12, 2013 Jkt 229001 losses. The CSB’s investigation found that the incident was caused by multiple technical, system, and organizational deficiencies. For detailed information on the incident and the CSB’s investigation, please refer to the CSB’s investigation report on the CSB’s Web site, www.csb.gov. Among its most important findings, the CSB concluded that the ISOM operators were likely fatigued from working 12-hour shifts, some working as many as 29 consecutive days during the turnaround of the unit prior to startup, and that, as a result, the operators’ judgment and problem-solving skills were likely degraded, hindering their ability to determine that a distillation tower in the ISOM unit was overfilling with hydrocarbons and to take prompt corrective steps. Accordingly, the CSB issued Recommendation No. 2005–04– I–TX–7 to API and the USW which reads in pertinent part as follows: [D]evelop fatigue prevention guidelines for the refining and petrochemical industries that, at a minimum, limit hours and days of work and address shift work. Both API and USW initially accepted the recommendation. The API, formed an ANSI committee that the USW joined. In August 2009, however, the USW withdrew from the committee in protest of what it perceived to be an imbalance in voting members (management vs. union and other representatives). The API proceeded with the committee’s work and issued an ANSI-approved Recommended Practice (RP 755) in April 2010. After review, the CSB staff found that RP 755 makes a contribution to chemical safety by explicitly stating that ‘‘workplace fatigue is a risk to safe operations’’ and also by suggesting various measures to manage fatigue risks. However, the staff determined that RP 755 does not fully meet the intent of the CSB recommendation in multiple important respects, and therefore has urged the Board to vote designating the status of Recommendation No. 2005–4– I–TX–7 as ‘‘Open-Unacceptable Action.’’ At the meeting on April 24, 2013, the staff will present its analysis to the Board. Following the staff presentation, the Board will hear comments from the public. Following the conclusion of the public comment period, the Board will consider whether to approve the proposed evaluation and to change the status of Recommendation No. 2005– 04–I–TX–7 to ‘‘Open-Unacceptable Action’’ or to some other status in accordance with Board Order 22. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: The Board welcomes public comment on the staff PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 15931 evaluation and proposed disposition of Recommendation No. 2005–04–I–TX–7. The detailed draft evaluation will be posted on the CSB Web site by March 11, 2013, and will be available for review and comment until 5 p.m. E.D.T. on April 12, 2013. CSB encourages electronic submission of comments. Comments should be submitted by email to fatiguecomments@csb.gov. Comments may also be submitted by mail to Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, Attn: Amy McCormick, 2175 K Street, NW., Suite 650, Washington, DC 20037. Comments may be submitted in the body of the email message or as an attached PDF, MS Word, or plain text ASCII file. Files must be virus-free and unencrypted. Include CSB–13–01 in the subject line of the message. Please ensure that the comments themselves, whether in the subject line, the body of the email or in attached files, include the docket number (CSB–13–01), the agency name, and your full name and address. All comment and submissions must include the agency name and docket number. All comments received, including any personal information provided, will be made available to the public without modifications or deletions. While the public comments submitted before and during the meeting will be carefully analyzed by CSB staff and the Board, the Board does not assume any obligation to respond to comments individually or during the public meeting. Comments received by the CSB will be posted online in the Open Government section of the CSB Web site, http://www.csb.gov/ open.aspx. To ask any question regarding the submission of comments or to establish times to review these documents at CSB headquarters, please call Amy McCormick, Board Affairs Specialist, at (202) 261–7630. No factual analyses, conclusions, or findings presented by staff should be considered final. Only after the Board has considered the staff presentations, listened to public comments, and voted to approve a change in status of the recommendation should that status be considered final. The meeting will be free and open to the public. If you require a translator or interpreter, please notify the individual listed below as the ‘‘Contact Person for Further Information,’’ at least five business days prior to the meeting. The CSB is an independent Federal agency charged with investigating serious accidents that result in the release of extremely hazardous substances. The agency’s Board E:\FR\FM\13MRN1.SGM 13MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15929-15931]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05781]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food and Nutrition Service


Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; 
Comment Request--Impact of Implementation of the Affordable Care Act on 
SNAP Operations and Participation

AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), United States Department of 
Agriculture (USDA).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 
notice invites the general public and other public agencies to comment 
on this proposed information collection. This is a new collection for 
research on the impact of implementation of the Patient Protection and 
Affordable Care Act (ACA) on the operations of, and participation in, 
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 13, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection 
of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions 
of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the 
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the 
methodology and assumptions that were used; (c) ways to enhance the 
quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and 
(d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on 
those who are to respond, including use of appropriate automated, 
electronic, mechanical or other technological collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology.
    Comments may be sent to: Steven Carlson, Office of Research and 
Analysis, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 
3101 Park Center Drive, Room 1014, Alexandria, VA 22302. Comments may 
also be submitted via fax to the attention of Steven Carlson at 703-
305-2576 or via email to Steve.Carlson@fns.usda.gov. Comments will also 
be accepted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments electronically.
    All written comments will be open for public inspection at the 
office of the Food and Nutrition Service during regular business hours 
(8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday) at 3101 Park Center Drive, 
Room 1014, Alexandria, Virginia 22302.
    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the 
request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will 
be a matter of public record.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or 
copies of this information collection should be directed to Steven 
Carlson at 703-305-2017. Information requests submitted through email 
should refer to the title of this proposed collection and/or the OMB 
approval number in the subject line.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Impact of Implementation of the Affordable Care Act on SNAP 
Operations and Participation.
    OMB Number: 0584--NEW.
    Expiration Date: Not Yet Determined.
    Type of Request: New Collection.
    Abstract: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is 
the USDA's largest nutrition program, helping over 46 million low-
income Americans (in fiscal year 2012) to purchase food. The program, 
administered by the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), is designed to 
respond to broad economic and individual circumstances as they change 
over time. The program's operating environment will be influenced 
importantly by the implementation of the ACA.
    This study will assess the impact of ACA implementation on 
participation in the SNAP among nonelderly nondisabled adults, ages 19-
64. This issue has major significance not only in its implications for 
Federal and State

[[Page 15930]]

budgets, but also more generally for the economic well-being of 
America's adult workers and their families. ACA implementation could 
potentially have a profound impact on SNAP participation among 
nonelderly nondisabled adults 19 to 64 in many ways, including:
     Increase the number of nonelderly nondisabled adults that 
will newly apply for health coverage, including many who qualify for 
SNAP but do not participate. This could lead to a substantial increase 
in SNAP participation, even in States that do not implement the 
expanded Medicaid limits for income eligibility and retain their pre-
ACA Medicaid eligibility standards.
     ACA's investment of Federal resources for improving 
eligibility information technology (IT) can be used to improve systems 
that Medicaid shares with SNAP.
     When people apply for SNAP and Medicaid benefits, 
caseworkers may draw from ACA's data-gathering mechanisms to reduce the 
work required to determine SNAP eligibility.
     Enrollment and retention under ACA departs from 
traditional methods used by public benefit programs. Among the major 
potential changes to be implemented in Medicaid are: the opportunity to 
enroll and renew remotely; verification through data matches; and 
renewing one's eligibility based on data matches, without required 
client action. These new approaches may inspire similar innovations 
with SNAP eligibility determination.
     In a State where Medicaid and SNAP use different 
eligibility systems, if Medicaid's system modernizes and SNAP's does 
not, SNAP will need to assume a larger share of spending to maintain 
and operate its eligibility system. Also, major changes in Medicaid 
eligibility could lead some States to move Medicaid outside the core 
responsibilities of social service agencies. If this happens, 
applicants may need to provide the same information multiple times to 
qualify for multiple programs, rather than once.
     Some States may use SNAP eligibility information to 
qualify uninsured adults and children for Medicaid. In States where 
Medicaid and SNAP use different eligibility systems, such an initiative 
could allow the IT work needed to connect the two systems to qualify 
for the Medicaid 90/10 match.
     States will need to rethink the integration of policies 
and models across benefits programs in light of the changes to Medicaid 
eligibility under ACA.
    The potential for growth in SNAP participation varies substantially 
among States, in both absolute numbers and as percentages of current 
State-by-State SNAP caseloads. FNS has undertaken this study to better 
anticipate and measure these effects, through a combination of 
qualitative and quantitative research consisting of rigorous case 
studies in selected States and analyses of emerging national survey 
datasets. In each of the six study sites, the study seeks to describe 
and determine (1) the coordination of SNAP and Medicaid enrollment and 
renewal processes in the State and whether any changes came about with 
the ACA; (2) the process for directing Medicaid applicants to SNAP; and 
(3) the impact of ACA implementation on the number of SNAP 
applications.
    The study includes a quantitative research component involving the 
use of administrative data in six States and a qualitative research 
component involving on-site staff interviews in six study sites. We 
will also undertake a detailed ``process mapping'' of the extent to 
which applicants for Medicaid enrollment or renewal are channeled 
toward SNAP enrollment or renewal (or vice versa). Our proposed 
quantitative approach relies on the analysis of case-level data 
extracted from State administrative datasets, in addition to State-
provided counts and tabulations from their administrative data. At each 
of the six sites, hour-long semi-structured interviews will be 
conducted with State and local SNAP and Medicaid administrators, SNAP 
and Medicaid caseworkers and directors of community-based organizations 
involved with integrating the SNAP and Medicaid programs.

Affected State, Local and Not-for-Profit Institutions

    There are 14 total types of respondents. Respondent groups 
identified include:
     Six State and local SNAP administrators and staff: State 
program director, assistant director for policy, assistant director for 
operations (including call center operations), local program director, 
case manager (initial enrollments) and case manager (renewals);
     Six State and local Medicaid administrators and staff: 
State program director, assistant director for policy, assistant 
director for operations, local program director, case manager (initial 
enrollments) and case manager (renewals); and
     Two community-level stakeholders: SNAP-focused Community 
Based Organization (CBO) representative and Medicaid-focused CBO 
representative.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: The total estimated number of 
respondents is 84. This includes: (a) 36 State and local SNAP 
administrators and staff; (b) 36 State and local Medicaid 
administrators and staff; and (c) 12 community-level stakeholders.
    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: Each respondent will 
be asked to participate in two in-person interviews--one interview in 
Year 2 of the project and a follow-up interview in Year 3 of the 
project.
    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 84.
    Estimated Time per Response: 60 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 10,080 minutes (168 
hours). See the table below for estimated total annual burden for each 
type of respondent.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                 Estimated
                                                                                       Estimated    Total  number   Estimated   avg. number
               Type of respondent                          Survey instrument           number of    of  responses     total       of hours    Estimated
                                                                                      respondents        per          annual        per      total hours
                                                                                                     respondent     responses     response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SNAP administrators and staff...................  Interview.........................           36               2           72         1.00           72
Medicaid administrators and staff...............  Interview.........................           36               2           72         1.00           72
Community-level stakeholders....................  Interview.........................           12               2           24         1.00           24
    Total Reporting Burden......................  ..................................           84               2          168         1.00          168
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



[[Page 15931]]

     Dated: March 4, 2013.
Audrey Rowe,
Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-05781 Filed 3-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P