Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: 2008 Farm Bill Provisions on Clarification of Split Issuance; Accrual of Benefits and Definition Changes, 66866-66872 [2016-22860]
Download as PDF
66866
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 81, No. 189
Thursday, September 29, 2016
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
7 CFR Parts 271 and 274
RIN 0584–AE02
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program: 2008 Farm Bill Provisions on
Clarification of Split Issuance; Accrual
of Benefits and Definition Changes
Food and Nutrition Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Food and Nutrition
Service (FNS) is proposing changes to
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP) issuance regulations in
accordance with the Food, Conservation
and Energy Act of 2008, Public Law
110–234 (‘‘the 2008 Farm Bill’’). The
proposal would implement several
provisions of the 2008 Farm Bill to:
Clarify that monthly SNAP benefits
must be issued in one lump sum;
require SNAP accounts to be inactive for
a minimum of 6 months before taking
benefits off-line; require benefits taken
off-line to be restored within 48 hours
of the recipient’s request; and require
permanent expungement of unused
benefits after 12 months of account
inactivity. This proposal also addresses
the requirement to notify households
when benefits are taken off-line. Finally,
FNS is updating SNAP definitions in 7
CFR part 271, to reflect the Program’s
new name and the issuance of benefits
through Electronic Benefit Transfer
(EBT) systems.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before November 28,
2016 to be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: The Food and Nutrition
Service, USDA, invites interested
persons to submit comments on this
proposed rule. Comments may be
submitted by one of the following
methods:
• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Preferred
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:35 Sep 28, 2016
Jkt 238001
method; follow the on-line instructions
for submitting comments.
• Mail: Comments should be
addressed to Vicky T. Robinson, Chief,
Retailer Management and Issuance
Branch, Retailer Policy and
Management Division, Rm. 418, 3101
Park Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia
22302.
This proposed rule would codify and
clarify certain technical, operational
aspects to States related to benefit
issuance. It also requests comment
about proposed interpretation of taking
benefits off line and expunging benefits.
All comments submitted in response to
this proposed rule will be included in
the record and will be made available to
the public. Please be advised that the
substance of the comments and the
identity of the individuals or entities
submitting the comments will be subject
to public disclosure. FNS will make the
comments publicly available on the
Internet via https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Vicky Robinson, Chief, Retailer
Management and Issuance Branch,
Retailer Policy and Management, Rm.
418, 3101 Park Center Drive,
Alexandria, Virginia 22302, or by phone
at 703–305–2476.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 4113 (Clarification of Split
Issuance) and 4114 (Accrual of Benefits)
of the 2008 Farm Bill amended section
7 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008
(7 U.S.C. 2016) (‘‘the Food and Nutrition
Act’’), which pertains to SNAP benefit
issuance. In addition, section 4001
updated the language in the Food and
Nutrition Act to reflect the Program’s
name change from the Food Stamp
Program to the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (SNAP), and section
4115 de-obligated coupons as of June
18, 2009, and made EBT cards the sole
method of benefit delivery.
This rulemaking proposes to
implement the 2008 Farm Bill
amendments to the Food and Nutrition
Act, and to update the general
information and definitions of 7 CFR
part 271 to reflect the Program’s new
name and issuance of benefits through
EBT systems. The elimination of all
other benefit delivery options was
addressed in the ‘‘Regulation
Restructuring: Issuance Regulation
Update and Reorganization to Reflect
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the End of Coupon Issuance Systems’’
rule published in final at 75 FR 18377
on April 12, 2010, which became
effective on June 11, 2010. The 2008
Farm Bill provisions addressed in this
Proposed Rule were implemented
through FNS implementing memo on
October 1, 2008.
7 CFR Part 271—General Information
and Definitions
FNS is proposing to add new
definitions associated with the current
EBT issuance system and to update the
terminology in 7 CFR part 271, to reflect
the program’s new name and the
elimination of coupons. Furthermore,
FNS proposes to change the definition
of ‘‘Drug addiction or alcoholic
treatment and rehabilitation program’’
to be consistent with current policy,
which does not require programs to be
eligible to receive funding under Part B
of title XIX of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 300x et seq.) in order to
redeem SNAP benefits. Programs that
receive funding under part B of title
XIX, programs that are eligible to
receive funding but do not actually
receive funding under part B of title
XIX, and programs that are not eligible
to receive funding but operate to further
the purposes of part B of title XIX to
provide treatment to drug addicts and or
alcoholics, are all eligible. None of the
changes to part 271 would have any
policy implications.
7 CFR Part 274—Issuance and Use of
Program Benefits
The general provisions proposed in
part 274 are statutorily required by the
Food and Nutrition Act. These
provisions were administratively
implemented on October 1, 2008, via an
FNS implementation memo, but would
be codified with this proposed rule. The
discussion below and the subsequent
regulatory language for this part provide
additional details to address operational
processes and/or clarify current policy.
Where FNS is also proposing changes to
current processes, it is so noted.
Split Issuance
Prior to the 2008 Farm Bill, some
State agencies had received strong
interest from stakeholders to divide
each individual household’s monthly
allotment into two or more issuances
over the month. Up to that point, no
State had ever split households’ benefit
allotments. While not explicitly
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
29SEP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Proposed Rules
prohibiting splitting the issuance of
monthly allotments, the current SNAP
regulations are based on a one-time
issuance per month for ongoing benefits
with 7 CFR 274.2(d) stating that ‘‘all
households shall be placed on an
issuance schedule so that they receive
their benefits on or about the same date
each month.’’
The purpose of splitting benefit
allotments, according to retail industry
proponents, would be to help
authorized SNAP stores better manage
their food stock, employee hours and
traffic flow. Proponents have also
suggested that it would ensure that
SNAP participants spread their benefit
spending over the course of the month
instead of depleting the entire allotment
early on and not having sufficient funds
to meet their nutritional needs as the
end of the month approaches. However,
section 4113 of the 2008 Farm Bill now
requires that State agencies issue a
household’s ongoing monthly benefit
allotment in one lump sum. Proponents
of the one issuance per month limitation
have argued that requiring the entire
monthly benefit allotment to be issued
at one time allows households to make
large buying trips and to purchase large,
economy-size containers of staple foods.
It also allows households with small
benefit amounts—such as seniors or
those with limited transportation
options—to make one shopping trip
during the month.
To address retailer concerns regarding
monthly spikes in traffic flow, State
agencies have the option to stagger the
issuance of benefits to individual
households over multiple days of the
month in accordance with 7 CFR
274.2(d)(1). Staggered issuance, in this
context, means issuing benefits to a
group of SNAP recipients on one date of
a month, and issuing benefits to another
group of recipients on a different date of
the month, and so on, so that all SNAP
recipients in the State are not receiving
their monthly allotment and shopping
on the same day. Staggered issuance
allows authorized SNAP stores to
manage better their food stock,
employee hours and traffic flow, while
still allowing recipients to make bulk
purchases and/or limit their shopping
trips to once per month. When a State
agency changes its issuance schedule to
institute or expand a staggered issuance
schedule, State agencies would continue
to have the option to divide the
issuances into two parts during the
transition month to meet the
requirement that no more than 40 days
elapses between the issuance of any two
allotments provided to a household
participating longer than two
consecutive, complete months. In
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:35 Sep 28, 2016
Jkt 238001
general, the prohibition against splitting
ongoing monthly issuances is not
intended to change policy or practice
with respect to the issuance of benefits
in any other area, including expedited
benefits, the proration of benefits for
partial months, the issuance of
supplemental benefits in the event a
benefit correction is necessary, or the
option to issue benefits semimonthly to
residents of drug or alcohol addiction
treatment facilities.
This provision would be codified at 7
CFR 274.2(c).
Benefit Expungement
Under the previous food stamp
coupon issuance system, paper coupons
did not have an expiration date.
Households could accumulate an
unlimited amount of benefits in the
form of paper coupons and spend them
at any time in the future, until the 2008
Farm Bill de-obligated all food stamp
coupons as of June 2009. Currently
under EBT, consistent with section 4115
of the 2008 Farm Bill, benefits are
expunged (permanently removed) from
inactive accounts if the account has
been inactive for one year. Current
policy considers an account active if the
household initiates an action that affects
the balance of the account, such as a
purchase or refund, at least once every
12 months. As long as the account is
active, States are not allowed to
expunge any benefits even if there are
benefits in the account that were issued
more than 12 months ago. Only when
the account has been inactive for 12
months, may State agencies begin to
permanently remove benefits from a
household’s account at the benefit
allotment level. This policy and
approach to expungement was in place
through regulations prior to the 2008
Farm Bill.
The 2008 Farm Bill requires State
agencies to establish a procedure for
recovering electronic benefits from a
household’s account due to inactivity
and to expunge benefits that have not
been accessed by a household after a
period of 12 months. Because
expungement has been a regulatory
requirement since the beginning of EBT
implementation, all State agencies
already have a process in place for
expunging benefits from a household’s
EBT account due to inactivity.
Furthermore, the 2008 Farm Bill
implementation memo issued on July 3,
2008, maintained the current
expungement process outlined in the
previous paragraph. However, after
further review of the statutory language,
FNS has determined that there is
sufficient ambiguity in the language to
allow for two different interpretations.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66867
Section 7(h)(12)(C) of the Food and
Nutrition Act reads, ‘‘A State agency
shall expunge benefits that have not
been accessed by a household after a
period of 12 months.’’ This language
could be interpreted to support SNAP’s
current expungement policy
(interpretation #1) of only expunging
benefits from EBT accounts that have
not been accessed in 12 months (i.e.,
inactive accounts). This interpretation
focuses on the account referenced in
section 7(h)(12)(A) of the statute, which
requires State agencies to establish a
procedure for recovering electronic
benefits from the account of a
household due to inactivity. Another
interpretation (interpretation #2) could
be that benefits that have not been used
after 12 months must be expunged
regardless of whether the household has
accessed the account (i.e., regardless of
account activity).
Since the 2008 Farm Bill passed, FNS
has received feedback from some States
in support of the second interpretation.
This support emphasizes that SNAP
households should be prevented from
accumulating excessively high balances
in their SNAP EBT accounts. High
balances, some States have indicated, do
not align with the true intent of the
program, and hold taxpayer money
inactive that could otherwise be spent
in a beneficial way. As a result, FNS is
requesting comments through this
proposed rulemaking to obtain further
feedback from State agencies as well as
other stakeholders, such as advocates
and EBT processors, regarding the
possibility of changing the current
expungement process to reflect a
process in line with interpretation #2.
Under interpretation #2, FNS is
particularly interested in receiving
comments on how to address a scenario
in which a household receives restored
benefits for multiple months in one
lump sum as a result of a fair hearing
finding. This is one possible reason a
household might have a large SNAP
balance. FNS understands that, in these
types of situations, a household would
have a shorter period of time overall to
spend the restored benefits they were
entitled to receive for previous months
than would have been the case if the
benefits were provided monthly as
originally required. The restored
benefits would be in addition to any
ongoing benefits the household is
receiving, which must also be spent
within 12 months. However, FNS is also
sensitive to the automated system
processes that would be impacted if it
instituted exceptions to a requirement
that State agencies expunge unused
benefits 12 months after they were
issued.
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
29SEP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
66868
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Proposed Rules
In addition to comments on each of
the two expungement policy
interpretations, FNS is also interested in
receiving comments on whether every
State agency should be given the option
to choose one of the two expungement
processes discussed here. Therefore,
both expungement processes (i.e.
expunging unused benefits after one
year of account inactivity or expunging
unused benefits one year after each
allotment is issued) would be allowed,
giving each State agency the flexibility
to choose which process to implement.
Respondents who support the second
alternative (i.e. expunging unused
benefits one year after each allotment is
issued), either as mandatory or as an
option, should also provide comments
regarding household notification of the
new expungement policy and suggested
effective dates. For example, would an
effective date of one year after the final
rule’s publication date be a suitable
timeframe for providing notice to clients
that unused benefits over 12 months old
will be permanently expunged or
should the timeframe be longer or
shorter and why?
To summarize: Under interpretation
#1, SNAP benefits would only be
expunged if the account has been
inactive for 12 months. As long as the
account is active, no benefits would be
expunged regardless of when the
benefits were issued, and benefits could
continue to accumulate as long as the
household remains eligible for benefits.
Under interpretation #2, households
would have 12 months from the date of
issuance to spend each benefit allotment
they receive even if the household is
accessing the account and using
benefits.
In this proposed rule, the proposed
regulatory language is in line with the
2008 Farm Bill Implementation Memo,
which mirrored current policy of
expunging benefits only from inactive
EBT accounts. Final language will take
into consideration the comments
received regarding both possible
expungement interpretations discussed
above.
This rulemaking also proposes to
codify the current policy of requiring
State agencies to expunge benefits at the
benefit allotment level. In other words,
the entire balance of a SNAP EBT
account could not be permanently
removed due to inactivity if there are
benefit allotments that have not been
available to the household for at least 12
months. Instead, the State would need
to wait 12 months from the date when
each benefit allotment was issued to the
household or from the last date of
account activity, whichever date is later,
before expunging those particular funds.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:35 Sep 28, 2016
Jkt 238001
Furthermore, to ensure that benefits
are not available to the household
longer than allowed by statute, FNS is
proposing to require State agencies to
expunge benefits from the EBT system
or, if offline, from the State records on
a daily basis.
This proposed rule also clarifies that
the expungement timeframe
requirement would not apply to cases
that have been closed due to the death
of all household members. In most
cases, this provision would apply to
one-person households. Once the State
agency has confirmed a death match
and closed the case in accordance with
7 CFR 272.14, there is no one left in the
household who is entitled to the
benefits. In such cases, State agencies
would be required to permanently
expunge all SNAP benefits in the
household’s account regardless of when
the benefits were issued or last used.
This provision would prevent
unauthorized persons from accessing
and using benefits that remain in a
deceased household’s account. For all
other SNAP cases, benefits would
continue to remain in the SNAP account
even after the SNAP case is closed
(unless taken off-line due to inactivity
as discussed below) until the benefits
have aged off in accordance with
expungement requirements.
This provision would be codified at 7
CFR 274.2(h)(2).
Moving Benefits Off-Line
Prior to the 2008 Farm Bill, EBT
regulations allowed State agencies to
move all benefits in an inactive SNAP
account off-line if the account had not
been accessed over a three-month
period. Once benefits are taken off-line,
they are no longer immediately
accessible to the household, but must be
reinstated if the household reapplies for
the program or requests that the
remaining benefits be moved back online prior to expungement. However,
some households, especially seniors
who qualify for a small amount of
benefits, have been known to save up
those smaller amounts and use several
months’ worth in one shopping trip. For
these households, three months may
have been too short a period before
moving benefits off-line. As a result,
section 4114 of the 2008 Farm Bill
stipulated 6 months as the time period
that an EBT account must be inactive
before a State agency may move benefits
off-line. State agencies are not required
to take inactive benefits off-line at all
prior to expungement, but if a State
agency wishes to exercise the option to
do so, it must wait until an EBT account
has been inactive for at least 6 months.
In accordance with the July 3, 2008,
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
implementing memo, this provision was
implemented on October 1, 2008.
Because ‘‘off-line’’ was not previously
defined in regulations, FNS is taking
this opportunity to propose such a
definition. The off-line definition would
not impact a client’s ability to get
benefits reinstated, or the timeframes.
The definition serves only to provide
State agencies and EBT processors the
parameters for operationalizing the offline provision. FNS welcomes
comments regarding the impact this
definition would have on State agencies’
EBT issuance systems.
Going forward, taking benefits ‘‘offline’’ would mean that the benefits are
being removed from the EBT account
and the EBT system. Moreover, this
regulation proposes that, when taking
benefits off-line, from a financial
management perspective, the EBT
contractor treat these benefits like
expungements by removing benefits
from the Account Management Agent
(AMA). The AMA is an accounting
system that interfaces with the U.S.
Department of Treasury to keep track of
benefit authorizations, returned benefits
such as expungements, and benefit
redemptions. However, unlike a
permanent expungement, information
about the benefits (amount, availability
date, last used date, etc.) would be
stored elsewhere so that the benefits can
be reissued upon timely contact by the
household.
The law does not allow State agencies
to make SNAP benefits in an inactive
EBT account inaccessible to a client
prior to expungement, unless they
exercise the option to store benefits offline within the permitted timeframes.
Therefore, under the proposed
definition of ‘‘off-line’’, State agencies
would no longer be able to flag an
account as ‘‘dormant’’ or otherwise
deactivate the account to make benefits
inaccessible to the client, and yet keep
the benefits on-line. FNS is proposing
this limitation because such a practice
would defeat the logic of the original
regulation that permitted benefits to be
moved off-line. When the original
regulation to allow State agencies to
take benefits off-line was implemented,
the increased computer system capacity
needed to maintain all EBT accounts online was more expensive than it is now.
By taking inactive EBT accounts offline, the goal was to reduce the overall
cost of EBT services. The incremental
cost of additional system capacity,
however, is now considerably less
expensive. Therefore, the financial
motives for moving benefits off-line are
no longer a significant factor.
Nevertheless, some State agencies are
choosing to make benefits inaccessible
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
29SEP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Proposed Rules
after a period of inactivity in order to
establish contact with the household
and verify continued eligibility. FNS
believes this is contrary to the intent of
the law. Therefore, as noted above, this
rule would no longer permit the practice
of simply making benefits inaccessible
without actually moving them off-line.
Furthermore, by taking the benefits out
of the EBT system, this provision would
provide additional system security by
preventing unauthorized persons from
accessing and using accumulated
benefits that remain dormant in a
household’s account. State agencies
would still be able to flag a household’s
EBT account at various stages of
inactivity for monitoring purposes, but
the benefits would need to remain
accessible to the household unless
moved off-line or permanently
expunged.
Section 4114 of the 2008 Farm Bill
also requires State agencies to send a
notice to the household when the
household’s benefits are taken off-line
and to make the benefits available again
within 48 hours of the household’s
request. The Congressional intent, as
stipulated in the Congressional record,
was that notification be closely tied to
the date benefits would move off-line.
Therefore, this rule proposes in
273.2(h)(1) to allow States to choose
when to provide notification as long as
it is within 10 days prior to or
concurrent with moving benefits offline. Although not required, some State
agencies may want to give clients
sufficient notice to access the account to
prevent benefits from being taken offline altogether. Because individual offline notification is now a statutory
requirement, State agencies may no
longer receive a waiver to provide
general off-line notification as part of
initial training or recertification.
Inactive accounts with a zero balance
that are taken off-line do not require a
notice because no actual benefits are
made inaccessible to the household.
As already required at 7 CFR
274.2(h)(1), the notice must describe the
steps necessary to bring the recovered
benefits back on-line. State agencies
should make the process for reinstating
off-line benefits simple for households.
A general request for assistance from a
household that has had benefits moved
off-line should be considered a request
for reinstatement of benefits. In other
words, households should not have to
follow a complicated reinstatement
option in order to get benefits restored
to their accounts. Rather, eligibility
workers and local office or call center
employees should assist households in
initiating the process for reinstating
benefits. Once the benefits are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:35 Sep 28, 2016
Jkt 238001
reinstated, the benefit aging process
must start over so that the household
has another six months to access the
account before the reinstated benefits
are taken off-line again, and another 12
months to access the account before
those benefits are expunged due to
inactivity.
This provision would be codified at 7
CFR 274.2(h)(1).
Procedural Matters
Executive Order 12866 and Executive
Order 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563,
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules
and of promoting flexibility. This
proposed rule has been determined to
be not significant and was not reviewed
by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in conformance with
Executive Order 12866.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
This proposed rule has been
designated as not significant by the
Office of Management and Budget,
therefore, no Regulatory Impact
Analysis is required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601–612) requires Agencies to
analyze the impact of rulemaking on
small entities and consider alternatives
that would minimize any significant
impacts on a substantial number of
small entities. Pursuant to that review,
this rule is certified not to have a
significant 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
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66869
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 proposed rule does not contain
Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) that
impose costs on State, local, or tribal
governments or to the private sector of
$100 million or more in any one year.
This proposed rule is, therefore, not
subject to the requirements of sections
202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Executive Order 12372
SNAP is listed in the Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance under No.
10.551. For the reasons set forth in 2
CFR chapter IV, this Program is
excluded from 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.
FNS has considered the impact of this
proposed rule on State and local
governments and has determined that
this rulemaking does not have
federalism implications. This proposed
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 proposed rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This proposed 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 proposed 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.
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
29SEP1
66870
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 13175, requires
Federal agencies to consult and
coordinate with tribes on a governmentto-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 rulemaking on the
tribe or Indian tribal governments, or
whether this rulemaking may preempt
tribal law. USDA did not receive any
comments specific to this proposed rule
during the sessions. Reports from the
consultative sessions were made part of
the USDA annual reporting on Tribal
Consultation and Collaboration. USDA
offers consultation opportunities, such
as webinars and teleconferences, for
collaborative conversations with tribal
leaders and their representatives
concerning ways to improve rules with
regard to their effect on Indian country
on a quarterly basis as part of its yearly
tribal consultation schedule.
We are unaware of any current tribal
laws that could be in conflict with the
proposed rule. We request that
commenters address any concerns in
this regard in their responses.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 proposed rule
will not in any way limit or reduce the
ability of protected classes of
individuals to receive SNAP benefits on
the basis of their race, color, national
origin, sex, age, disability, religion or
political belief nor will it have a
differential impact on minority owned
or operated business establishments,
and woman owned or operated business
establishments that participate in SNAP.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. chap. 35; see 5 CFR 1320)
requires the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approve all collections of
information by a Federal agency before
18:35 Sep 28, 2016
Jkt 238001
E-Government Act Compliance
The Food and Nutrition Service is
committed to complying with the
E-Government Act, 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.
List of Subjects in 7 Parts 271 and 274
Food stamps, Grant programs—social
programs, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For reason set forth in the preamble,
7 CFR parts 271 and 274 are proposed
to be amended as follows:
SUBCHAPTER C—[AMENDED]
1. In the heading of subchapter C of
chapter II, remove the words ‘‘Food
Stamp’’ and add in their place the
words ‘‘Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance’’.
■ 2. The authority citation for 7 CFR
parts 271 and 274 continues to read as
follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2011–2036.
PART 271—GENERAL INFORMATION
AND DEFINITIONS
§ 271.1
Civil Rights Impact Analysis
VerDate Sep<11>2014
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 proposed rule does not
contain information collection
requirements subject to approval by
OMB under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995.
General purpose and scope.
3. In § 271.1:
a. Revise paragraph (a);
b. Remove the word ‘‘coupons’’ from
the fourth sentence of paragraph (b) and
add in its place ‘‘SNAP benefits’’; and
■ c. Remove the word ‘‘coupon’’ from
the tenth sentence of paragraph (b) and
add in its place ‘‘benefit’’.
The revision reads as follows:
■
■
■
§ 271.1
General purpose and scope.
(a) Purpose of SNAP. In accordance
with section 2 of the Food and Nutrition
Act of 2008, SNAP is designed to
promote the general welfare and to
safeguard the health and well being of
the Nation’s population by raising the
levels of nutrition among low-income
households.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. In § 271.2:
■ a. Amend the definition of Allotment
by removing the word ‘‘coupons’’ and
adding in its place the word ‘‘benefits’’;
■ b. Remove the definition of
Authorization to participate card (ATP);
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
c. Add definitions for Benefit and
Benefit issuer in alphabetical order;
■ d. Remove the definition of Bulk
storage point;
■ e. Add a definition for Contractor (or
Contracted vendor) in alphabetical
order;
■ f. Remove the definitions of Coupon
issuer and Direct access system;
■ g. Revise the definition of Drug
addiction or alcoholic treatment and
rehabilitation program;
■ h. Add definitions for Electronic
Benefit Transfer (EBT) account,
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card,
and Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT)
system in alphabetical order;
■ i. Amend the definition of Eligible
foods by removing the word ‘‘coupons’’
where it appears twice in paragraph (3)
of the definition, and adding in its place
the words ‘‘SNAP benefits’’;
■ j. Amend the definition of
Employment and training (E&T)
component by removing ‘‘6(d)(4)(B)(iv)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘6(d)(4)(B)’’ and
by removing ‘‘(7 U.S.C. 2014(2)(4)(B))’’
and adding in its place ‘‘(7 U.S.C.
2015(d)(4)(B))’’;
■ k. Amend the definition of
Employment and training (E&T)
mandatory participant by removing ‘‘7
U.S.C. 2014(d)(1)’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘7 U.S.C. 2015(d)(1)’’;
■ l. Amend the definition of Firm’s
practice by removing the words ‘‘food
coupons’’ and adding in their place the
words ‘‘SNAP benefits’’;
■ m. Add a definition for Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (Food and
Nutrition Act) in alphabetical order;
■ n. Revise the definition of Food Stamp
Act;
■ o. Amend the definition of
Identification (ID) card by removing the
words ‘‘food coupons’’ and adding in its
place the words ‘‘SNAP benefits’’;
■ p. Add definitions for Interoperability,
Manual transaction, and Manual
voucher in alphabetical order;
■ q. Amend the definition of
Overissuance by removing the word
‘‘coupons’’ and adding in its place the
word ‘‘benefits’’;
■ r. Add definitions for Personal
identification number (PIN), Point-ofsale (POS) terminal, and Primary
account number (PAN) in alphabetical
order;
■ s. Remove the definition of Program;
■ t. Add definitions for Retailer EBT
Data Exchange (REDE) system and
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP or Program) in
alphabetical order.
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
■
§ 271.2
*
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
Definitions.
*
*
29SEP1
*
*
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Benefit means the value of
supplemental nutrition assistance
provided to a household by means of an
EBT system or other means of providing
assistance, as determined by the
Secretary.
Benefit issuer means any office of the
State agency or any person, partnership,
corporation, organization, political
subdivision or other entity with which
a State agency has contracted for, or to
which it has delegated functional
responsibility, in connection with the
issuance of benefits to households.
*
*
*
*
*
Contractor (or contracted vendor)
means an entity that is selected to
perform EBT-related services for the
State agency.
*
*
*
*
*
Drug addiction or alcoholic treatment
and rehabilitation program means any
drug addiction or alcoholic treatment
and rehabilitation program conducted
by a private, nonprofit organization or
institution, or a publicly operated
community mental health center and
certified by the requisite State title XIX
Agency as:
(1) Receiving funding under part B of
title XIX of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 300x et seq.);
(2) Eligible to receive funding under
part B of title XIX even if it does not
actually receive funding; or
(3) Operating to further the purposes
of part B of title XIX, to provide
treatment to drug addicts and or
alcoholics.
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT)
account means a set of records
containing demographic, card, benefit,
transaction and balance data for an
individual household within the EBT
system that is maintained and managed
by a State or its contractor as part of the
client case record.
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card
means an on-line magnetic stripe card
or off-line smart card issued to a
household member or authorized
representative through the EBT system
by a benefit issuer.
*
*
*
*
*
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT)
system means an electronic payments
system under which household benefits
are issued from and stored in a central
databank, maintained and managed by a
State or its contractor, that uses
electronic funds transfer and point-ofsale technology for the delivery and
control of food and other public
assistance benefits.
*
*
*
*
*
Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (Food
and Nutrition Act) means title 7 of the
United States Code, sections 2011
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:35 Sep 28, 2016
Jkt 238001
through 2036 (7 U.S.C. 2011–2036),
including any subsequent amendments
thereto.
Food Stamp Act means the Food
Stamp Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95–113) as
amended through Public Law 108–269,
July 2, 2004.
*
*
*
*
*
Interoperability means a system that
enables program benefits issued via an
EBT card to be redeemed outside the
State that issued the benefits.
*
*
*
*
*
Manual transaction means an EBT
transaction that is processed with the
use of a paper manual voucher when
there is an EBT system outage.
Manual voucher means a paper
document signed by the EBT cardholder
that allows a retailer to redeem benefits
through a manual transaction.
Personal Identification Number (PIN)
means a numeric code selected by or
assigned to a household and used to
verify the identity of an EBT cardholder
when performing an EBT transaction.
*
*
*
*
*
Point-of-Sale (POS) terminal means a
range of devices deployed at authorized
retail food stores for redeeming benefits
through the use of an EBT card and PIN
to initiate electronic debits and credits
of household EBT and retailer bank
accounts.
Primary Account Number (PAN)
means a number embossed or printed on
the EBT card and encoded onto the card
to identify the State and EBT account
holder.
*
*
*
*
*
Retailer EBT Data Exchange (REDE)
system means the FNS system that
allows the automated exchange of
authorized retailer demographic data
between FNS and the State and/or EBT
contractor for notification of changes in
retailer Program participation.
*
*
*
*
*
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP or Program) means the
program operated pursuant to the Food
and Nutrition Act of 2008.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 271.4
[Amended]
5. In § 271.4(a)(2) remove the word
‘‘coupons’’ and add in its place ‘‘SNAP
benefits and EBT cards’’.
■
§ 271.5
[Amended]
6. In § 271.5:
a. Remove ‘‘coupon’’ and ‘‘coupons’’
wherever they appear and add in their
place ‘‘benefit’’ and ‘‘benefits’’,
respectively, including the section
heading;
■ b. Amend paragraph (a) by adding
‘‘and EBT cards’’ at the end of the last
sentence;
■
■
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66871
c. Amend the introductory text of
paragraph (b) by removing the word
‘‘ATP’’ and adding in its place the word
‘‘EBT’’;
■ d. Remove paragraphs (b)(1) through
(3); and
■ e. Amend paragraph (c) by removing
the word ‘‘ATP’s’’ wherever they appear
and adding in its place the words ‘‘EBT
cards’’.
■
PART 274—ISSUANCE AND USE OF
BENEFITS
7. In § 274.2:
a. Revise paragraph (c);
b. Amend paragraph (e)(1) by
removing the words ‘‘of paragraphs (e)
through (h)’’;
■ c. Amend paragraph (g)(3) by
removing the words ‘‘paragraph (h)(3)’’
and adding the words ‘‘paragraph (i)’’;
■ d. Revise paragraph (h);
■ e. Add paragraph (i).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
■
■
§ 274.2
Providing benefits to participants.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Benefit allotments. (1) State
agencies shall not issue ongoing
monthly benefit allotments to a
household in more than one issuance
during a month except with respect to
the issuance of benefits to a resident of
a drug and alcohol treatment and
rehabilitation program in accordance
with § 273.11(e) of this chapter.
(2) For those households which are to
receive a combined allotment, the State
agency shall provide the benefits for
both months as an aggregate (combined)
allotment, or as two separate allotments,
made available at the same time in
accordance with the timeframes
specified in § 273.2 of this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Inactive EBT accounts. An
inactive EBT account means that the
household has not initiated activity that
affects the balance of the household’s
SNAP benefits in the account, such as
a purchase or return, for a minimum of
six months.
(1) Off-line storage. If a household’s
EBT account is inactive for six months
or longer, State agencies may elect to
store all benefits in that account off-line.
(i) Off-line benefits are benefits that
have been removed from the EBT
system for storage by the State agency
and are no longer accessible to the
household unless and until the benefits
are reinstated upon contact by the
household.
(ii) The State agency shall send
written notification to the household up
to 10 days prior to or concurrent with
the action to store benefits off-line and
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
29SEP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
66872
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Proposed Rules
describe the steps necessary to bring the
benefits back on-line. If an inactive
account has a zero balance, a notice to
the household is not required.
(iii) Benefits stored off-line that have
not reached the 12-month timeframe for
expungement in accordance with
paragraph (h)(2) of this section shall be
reinstated and made available within 48
hours of reapplication or contact by the
household.
(iv) Off-line benefits shall be removed
from the Account Management Agent
system, making them unavailable to the
household. Upon reinstatement, the
benefits shall be reissued and the
account shall be reactivated or a new
account established to resume the
benefit aging process from the new
issuance date.
(2) Expungement. On a daily basis,
the State agency shall expunge benefits
from accounts that have been inactive
for a period of 12 months in accordance
with the following:
(i) When the oldest benefit allotment
has not been accessed by the household
for 12 months, the State agency shall
expunge benefits from the EBT account
or off-line storage at the monthly benefit
allotment level as each benefit allotment
ages to 12 months since the date of
issuance or since the last date of
account activity, whichever date is later.
(ii) Expunged benefits shall be
removed from the Account Management
Agent unless already removed as
provided in paragraph (h)(1) of this
section, and shall not be reinstated.
(iii) The State agency shall not
expunge any benefits from active
accounts even if there are benefit
allotments older than 12 months. If at
any time after the expungement process
begins, the household initiates activity
affecting the balance of the account, the
State shall stop expunging benefits from
the account and start the account aging
process over again for the remaining
benefits.
(iv) Notwithstanding the paragraph
(h)(2)(iii) of this section, in instances
when the State agency verifies a death
match for all certified members of the
household and closes the SNAP case in
accordance with § 272.14 of this
chapter, the State agency shall expunge
the remaining SNAP balance in the
household’s EBT account at that time.
(i) Procedures to adjust SNAP
accounts. Procedures shall be
established to permit the appropriate
managers to adjust SNAP benefits that
have already been posted to an EBT
account prior to the household
accessing the account; or to remove
benefits from inactive accounts for offline storage or expungement in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:35 Sep 28, 2016
Jkt 238001
accordance with paragraph (h) of this
section.
(1) Whenever benefits are stored offline or expunged, the State agency shall
document the date, amount of the
benefits and storage location in the
household case file.
(2) Issuance reports shall reflect the
adjustment to the State agency issuance
totals to comply with monthly issuance
reporting requirements prescribed under
§ 274.4.
Dated: September 14, 2016.
Telora T. Dean,
Acting Administrator, Food and Nutrition
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–22860 Filed 9–28–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2016–9113; Directorate
Identifier 2016–NM–042–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Defense and Space S.A. (Formerly
Known as Construcciones
Aeronauticas, S.A.) Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Defense and Space S.A.
(formerly known as Construcciones
Aeronauticas, S.A.) Model CN–235, CN
235–100, CN 235–200, and CN 235–300
airplanes. This proposed AD was
prompted by reports of cracks in certain
areas of the rear fuselage. This proposed
AD would require repetitive borescope
and detailed visual inspections of the
rear fuselage lateral beam and its
external area and repair if necessary. We
are proposing this AD to detect and
correct cracks in the rear fuselage lateral
beam and its external area; such
cracking could lead to failure of the
affected components, and result in
reduced structural integrity of the
fuselage.
SUMMARY:
We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by November 14,
2016.
DATES:
You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this NPRM, contact Airbus Defence and
Space, Services/Engineering Support,
´
Avenida de Aragon 404, 28022 Madrid,
Spain; telephone +34 91 585 55 84; fax
+34 91 585 31 27; email
MTA.TechnicalService@Airbus.com.
You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, WA. For information on
the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
9113; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations
office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace
Engineer, International Branch, ANM–
116, Transport Airplane Directorate,
FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057–3356; telephone 425–227–
1112; fax 425–227–1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2016–9113; Directorate Identifier
2016–NM–042–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD based on those comments.
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
29SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 189 (Thursday, September 29, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66866-66872]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22860]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 66866]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
7 CFR Parts 271 and 274
RIN 0584-AE02
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: 2008 Farm Bill
Provisions on Clarification of Split Issuance; Accrual of Benefits and
Definition Changes
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is proposing changes to
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) issuance
regulations in accordance with the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of
2008, Public Law 110-234 (``the 2008 Farm Bill''). The proposal would
implement several provisions of the 2008 Farm Bill to: Clarify that
monthly SNAP benefits must be issued in one lump sum; require SNAP
accounts to be inactive for a minimum of 6 months before taking
benefits off-line; require benefits taken off-line to be restored
within 48 hours of the recipient's request; and require permanent
expungement of unused benefits after 12 months of account inactivity.
This proposal also addresses the requirement to notify households when
benefits are taken off-line. Finally, FNS is updating SNAP definitions
in 7 CFR part 271, to reflect the Program's new name and the issuance
of benefits through Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) systems.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 28, 2016
to be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: The Food and Nutrition Service, USDA, invites interested
persons to submit comments on this proposed rule. Comments may be
submitted by one of the following methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Preferred method; follow the on-line instructions
for submitting comments.
Mail: Comments should be addressed to Vicky T. Robinson,
Chief, Retailer Management and Issuance Branch, Retailer Policy and
Management Division, Rm. 418, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria,
Virginia 22302.
This proposed rule would codify and clarify certain technical,
operational aspects to States related to benefit issuance. It also
requests comment about proposed interpretation of taking benefits off
line and expunging benefits. All comments submitted in response to this
proposed rule will be included in the record and will be made available
to the public. Please be advised that the substance of the comments and
the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments
will be subject to public disclosure. FNS will make the comments
publicly available on the Internet via https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vicky Robinson, Chief, Retailer
Management and Issuance Branch, Retailer Policy and Management, Rm.
418, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia 22302, or by phone at
703-305-2476.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 4113 (Clarification of Split Issuance) and 4114 (Accrual
of Benefits) of the 2008 Farm Bill amended section 7 of the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2016) (``the Food and Nutrition Act''),
which pertains to SNAP benefit issuance. In addition, section 4001
updated the language in the Food and Nutrition Act to reflect the
Program's name change from the Food Stamp Program to the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and section 4115 de-obligated
coupons as of June 18, 2009, and made EBT cards the sole method of
benefit delivery.
This rulemaking proposes to implement the 2008 Farm Bill amendments
to the Food and Nutrition Act, and to update the general information
and definitions of 7 CFR part 271 to reflect the Program's new name and
issuance of benefits through EBT systems. The elimination of all other
benefit delivery options was addressed in the ``Regulation
Restructuring: Issuance Regulation Update and Reorganization to Reflect
the End of Coupon Issuance Systems'' rule published in final at 75 FR
18377 on April 12, 2010, which became effective on June 11, 2010. The
2008 Farm Bill provisions addressed in this Proposed Rule were
implemented through FNS implementing memo on October 1, 2008.
7 CFR Part 271--General Information and Definitions
FNS is proposing to add new definitions associated with the current
EBT issuance system and to update the terminology in 7 CFR part 271, to
reflect the program's new name and the elimination of coupons.
Furthermore, FNS proposes to change the definition of ``Drug addiction
or alcoholic treatment and rehabilitation program'' to be consistent
with current policy, which does not require programs to be eligible to
receive funding under Part B of title XIX of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 300x et seq.) in order to redeem SNAP benefits. Programs
that receive funding under part B of title XIX, programs that are
eligible to receive funding but do not actually receive funding under
part B of title XIX, and programs that are not eligible to receive
funding but operate to further the purposes of part B of title XIX to
provide treatment to drug addicts and or alcoholics, are all eligible.
None of the changes to part 271 would have any policy implications.
7 CFR Part 274--Issuance and Use of Program Benefits
The general provisions proposed in part 274 are statutorily
required by the Food and Nutrition Act. These provisions were
administratively implemented on October 1, 2008, via an FNS
implementation memo, but would be codified with this proposed rule. The
discussion below and the subsequent regulatory language for this part
provide additional details to address operational processes and/or
clarify current policy. Where FNS is also proposing changes to current
processes, it is so noted.
Split Issuance
Prior to the 2008 Farm Bill, some State agencies had received
strong interest from stakeholders to divide each individual household's
monthly allotment into two or more issuances over the month. Up to that
point, no State had ever split households' benefit allotments. While
not explicitly
[[Page 66867]]
prohibiting splitting the issuance of monthly allotments, the current
SNAP regulations are based on a one-time issuance per month for ongoing
benefits with 7 CFR 274.2(d) stating that ``all households shall be
placed on an issuance schedule so that they receive their benefits on
or about the same date each month.''
The purpose of splitting benefit allotments, according to retail
industry proponents, would be to help authorized SNAP stores better
manage their food stock, employee hours and traffic flow. Proponents
have also suggested that it would ensure that SNAP participants spread
their benefit spending over the course of the month instead of
depleting the entire allotment early on and not having sufficient funds
to meet their nutritional needs as the end of the month approaches.
However, section 4113 of the 2008 Farm Bill now requires that State
agencies issue a household's ongoing monthly benefit allotment in one
lump sum. Proponents of the one issuance per month limitation have
argued that requiring the entire monthly benefit allotment to be issued
at one time allows households to make large buying trips and to
purchase large, economy-size containers of staple foods. It also allows
households with small benefit amounts--such as seniors or those with
limited transportation options--to make one shopping trip during the
month.
To address retailer concerns regarding monthly spikes in traffic
flow, State agencies have the option to stagger the issuance of
benefits to individual households over multiple days of the month in
accordance with 7 CFR 274.2(d)(1). Staggered issuance, in this context,
means issuing benefits to a group of SNAP recipients on one date of a
month, and issuing benefits to another group of recipients on a
different date of the month, and so on, so that all SNAP recipients in
the State are not receiving their monthly allotment and shopping on the
same day. Staggered issuance allows authorized SNAP stores to manage
better their food stock, employee hours and traffic flow, while still
allowing recipients to make bulk purchases and/or limit their shopping
trips to once per month. When a State agency changes its issuance
schedule to institute or expand a staggered issuance schedule, State
agencies would continue to have the option to divide the issuances into
two parts during the transition month to meet the requirement that no
more than 40 days elapses between the issuance of any two allotments
provided to a household participating longer than two consecutive,
complete months. In general, the prohibition against splitting ongoing
monthly issuances is not intended to change policy or practice with
respect to the issuance of benefits in any other area, including
expedited benefits, the proration of benefits for partial months, the
issuance of supplemental benefits in the event a benefit correction is
necessary, or the option to issue benefits semimonthly to residents of
drug or alcohol addiction treatment facilities.
This provision would be codified at 7 CFR 274.2(c).
Benefit Expungement
Under the previous food stamp coupon issuance system, paper coupons
did not have an expiration date. Households could accumulate an
unlimited amount of benefits in the form of paper coupons and spend
them at any time in the future, until the 2008 Farm Bill de-obligated
all food stamp coupons as of June 2009. Currently under EBT, consistent
with section 4115 of the 2008 Farm Bill, benefits are expunged
(permanently removed) from inactive accounts if the account has been
inactive for one year. Current policy considers an account active if
the household initiates an action that affects the balance of the
account, such as a purchase or refund, at least once every 12 months.
As long as the account is active, States are not allowed to expunge any
benefits even if there are benefits in the account that were issued
more than 12 months ago. Only when the account has been inactive for 12
months, may State agencies begin to permanently remove benefits from a
household's account at the benefit allotment level. This policy and
approach to expungement was in place through regulations prior to the
2008 Farm Bill.
The 2008 Farm Bill requires State agencies to establish a procedure
for recovering electronic benefits from a household's account due to
inactivity and to expunge benefits that have not been accessed by a
household after a period of 12 months. Because expungement has been a
regulatory requirement since the beginning of EBT implementation, all
State agencies already have a process in place for expunging benefits
from a household's EBT account due to inactivity. Furthermore, the 2008
Farm Bill implementation memo issued on July 3, 2008, maintained the
current expungement process outlined in the previous paragraph.
However, after further review of the statutory language, FNS has
determined that there is sufficient ambiguity in the language to allow
for two different interpretations.
Section 7(h)(12)(C) of the Food and Nutrition Act reads, ``A State
agency shall expunge benefits that have not been accessed by a
household after a period of 12 months.'' This language could be
interpreted to support SNAP's current expungement policy
(interpretation #1) of only expunging benefits from EBT accounts that
have not been accessed in 12 months (i.e., inactive accounts). This
interpretation focuses on the account referenced in section 7(h)(12)(A)
of the statute, which requires State agencies to establish a procedure
for recovering electronic benefits from the account of a household due
to inactivity. Another interpretation (interpretation #2) could be that
benefits that have not been used after 12 months must be expunged
regardless of whether the household has accessed the account (i.e.,
regardless of account activity).
Since the 2008 Farm Bill passed, FNS has received feedback from
some States in support of the second interpretation. This support
emphasizes that SNAP households should be prevented from accumulating
excessively high balances in their SNAP EBT accounts. High balances,
some States have indicated, do not align with the true intent of the
program, and hold taxpayer money inactive that could otherwise be spent
in a beneficial way. As a result, FNS is requesting comments through
this proposed rulemaking to obtain further feedback from State agencies
as well as other stakeholders, such as advocates and EBT processors,
regarding the possibility of changing the current expungement process
to reflect a process in line with interpretation #2.
Under interpretation #2, FNS is particularly interested in
receiving comments on how to address a scenario in which a household
receives restored benefits for multiple months in one lump sum as a
result of a fair hearing finding. This is one possible reason a
household might have a large SNAP balance. FNS understands that, in
these types of situations, a household would have a shorter period of
time overall to spend the restored benefits they were entitled to
receive for previous months than would have been the case if the
benefits were provided monthly as originally required. The restored
benefits would be in addition to any ongoing benefits the household is
receiving, which must also be spent within 12 months. However, FNS is
also sensitive to the automated system processes that would be impacted
if it instituted exceptions to a requirement that State agencies
expunge unused benefits 12 months after they were issued.
[[Page 66868]]
In addition to comments on each of the two expungement policy
interpretations, FNS is also interested in receiving comments on
whether every State agency should be given the option to choose one of
the two expungement processes discussed here. Therefore, both
expungement processes (i.e. expunging unused benefits after one year of
account inactivity or expunging unused benefits one year after each
allotment is issued) would be allowed, giving each State agency the
flexibility to choose which process to implement.
Respondents who support the second alternative (i.e. expunging
unused benefits one year after each allotment is issued), either as
mandatory or as an option, should also provide comments regarding
household notification of the new expungement policy and suggested
effective dates. For example, would an effective date of one year after
the final rule's publication date be a suitable timeframe for providing
notice to clients that unused benefits over 12 months old will be
permanently expunged or should the timeframe be longer or shorter and
why?
To summarize: Under interpretation #1, SNAP benefits would only be
expunged if the account has been inactive for 12 months. As long as the
account is active, no benefits would be expunged regardless of when the
benefits were issued, and benefits could continue to accumulate as long
as the household remains eligible for benefits. Under interpretation
#2, households would have 12 months from the date of issuance to spend
each benefit allotment they receive even if the household is accessing
the account and using benefits.
In this proposed rule, the proposed regulatory language is in line
with the 2008 Farm Bill Implementation Memo, which mirrored current
policy of expunging benefits only from inactive EBT accounts. Final
language will take into consideration the comments received regarding
both possible expungement interpretations discussed above.
This rulemaking also proposes to codify the current policy of
requiring State agencies to expunge benefits at the benefit allotment
level. In other words, the entire balance of a SNAP EBT account could
not be permanently removed due to inactivity if there are benefit
allotments that have not been available to the household for at least
12 months. Instead, the State would need to wait 12 months from the
date when each benefit allotment was issued to the household or from
the last date of account activity, whichever date is later, before
expunging those particular funds.
Furthermore, to ensure that benefits are not available to the
household longer than allowed by statute, FNS is proposing to require
State agencies to expunge benefits from the EBT system or, if offline,
from the State records on a daily basis.
This proposed rule also clarifies that the expungement timeframe
requirement would not apply to cases that have been closed due to the
death of all household members. In most cases, this provision would
apply to one-person households. Once the State agency has confirmed a
death match and closed the case in accordance with 7 CFR 272.14, there
is no one left in the household who is entitled to the benefits. In
such cases, State agencies would be required to permanently expunge all
SNAP benefits in the household's account regardless of when the
benefits were issued or last used. This provision would prevent
unauthorized persons from accessing and using benefits that remain in a
deceased household's account. For all other SNAP cases, benefits would
continue to remain in the SNAP account even after the SNAP case is
closed (unless taken off-line due to inactivity as discussed below)
until the benefits have aged off in accordance with expungement
requirements.
This provision would be codified at 7 CFR 274.2(h)(2).
Moving Benefits Off-Line
Prior to the 2008 Farm Bill, EBT regulations allowed State agencies
to move all benefits in an inactive SNAP account off-line if the
account had not been accessed over a three-month period. Once benefits
are taken off-line, they are no longer immediately accessible to the
household, but must be reinstated if the household reapplies for the
program or requests that the remaining benefits be moved back on-line
prior to expungement. However, some households, especially seniors who
qualify for a small amount of benefits, have been known to save up
those smaller amounts and use several months' worth in one shopping
trip. For these households, three months may have been too short a
period before moving benefits off-line. As a result, section 4114 of
the 2008 Farm Bill stipulated 6 months as the time period that an EBT
account must be inactive before a State agency may move benefits off-
line. State agencies are not required to take inactive benefits off-
line at all prior to expungement, but if a State agency wishes to
exercise the option to do so, it must wait until an EBT account has
been inactive for at least 6 months. In accordance with the July 3,
2008, implementing memo, this provision was implemented on October 1,
2008.
Because ``off-line'' was not previously defined in regulations, FNS
is taking this opportunity to propose such a definition. The off-line
definition would not impact a client's ability to get benefits
reinstated, or the timeframes. The definition serves only to provide
State agencies and EBT processors the parameters for operationalizing
the off-line provision. FNS welcomes comments regarding the impact this
definition would have on State agencies' EBT issuance systems.
Going forward, taking benefits ``off-line'' would mean that the
benefits are being removed from the EBT account and the EBT system.
Moreover, this regulation proposes that, when taking benefits off-line,
from a financial management perspective, the EBT contractor treat these
benefits like expungements by removing benefits from the Account
Management Agent (AMA). The AMA is an accounting system that interfaces
with the U.S. Department of Treasury to keep track of benefit
authorizations, returned benefits such as expungements, and benefit
redemptions. However, unlike a permanent expungement, information about
the benefits (amount, availability date, last used date, etc.) would be
stored elsewhere so that the benefits can be reissued upon timely
contact by the household.
The law does not allow State agencies to make SNAP benefits in an
inactive EBT account inaccessible to a client prior to expungement,
unless they exercise the option to store benefits off-line within the
permitted timeframes. Therefore, under the proposed definition of
``off-line'', State agencies would no longer be able to flag an account
as ``dormant'' or otherwise deactivate the account to make benefits
inaccessible to the client, and yet keep the benefits on-line. FNS is
proposing this limitation because such a practice would defeat the
logic of the original regulation that permitted benefits to be moved
off-line. When the original regulation to allow State agencies to take
benefits off-line was implemented, the increased computer system
capacity needed to maintain all EBT accounts on-line was more expensive
than it is now. By taking inactive EBT accounts off-line, the goal was
to reduce the overall cost of EBT services. The incremental cost of
additional system capacity, however, is now considerably less
expensive. Therefore, the financial motives for moving benefits off-
line are no longer a significant factor. Nevertheless, some State
agencies are choosing to make benefits inaccessible
[[Page 66869]]
after a period of inactivity in order to establish contact with the
household and verify continued eligibility. FNS believes this is
contrary to the intent of the law. Therefore, as noted above, this rule
would no longer permit the practice of simply making benefits
inaccessible without actually moving them off-line. Furthermore, by
taking the benefits out of the EBT system, this provision would provide
additional system security by preventing unauthorized persons from
accessing and using accumulated benefits that remain dormant in a
household's account. State agencies would still be able to flag a
household's EBT account at various stages of inactivity for monitoring
purposes, but the benefits would need to remain accessible to the
household unless moved off-line or permanently expunged.
Section 4114 of the 2008 Farm Bill also requires State agencies to
send a notice to the household when the household's benefits are taken
off-line and to make the benefits available again within 48 hours of
the household's request. The Congressional intent, as stipulated in the
Congressional record, was that notification be closely tied to the date
benefits would move off-line. Therefore, this rule proposes in
273.2(h)(1) to allow States to choose when to provide notification as
long as it is within 10 days prior to or concurrent with moving
benefits off-line. Although not required, some State agencies may want
to give clients sufficient notice to access the account to prevent
benefits from being taken off-line altogether. Because individual off-
line notification is now a statutory requirement, State agencies may no
longer receive a waiver to provide general off-line notification as
part of initial training or recertification. Inactive accounts with a
zero balance that are taken off-line do not require a notice because no
actual benefits are made inaccessible to the household.
As already required at 7 CFR 274.2(h)(1), the notice must describe
the steps necessary to bring the recovered benefits back on-line. State
agencies should make the process for reinstating off-line benefits
simple for households. A general request for assistance from a
household that has had benefits moved off-line should be considered a
request for reinstatement of benefits. In other words, households
should not have to follow a complicated reinstatement option in order
to get benefits restored to their accounts. Rather, eligibility workers
and local office or call center employees should assist households in
initiating the process for reinstating benefits. Once the benefits are
reinstated, the benefit aging process must start over so that the
household has another six months to access the account before the
reinstated benefits are taken off-line again, and another 12 months to
access the account before those benefits are expunged due to
inactivity.
This provision would be codified at 7 CFR 274.2(h)(1).
Procedural Matters
Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules and of promoting
flexibility. This proposed rule has been determined to be not
significant and was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) in conformance with Executive Order 12866.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
This proposed rule has been designated as not significant by the
Office of Management and Budget, therefore, no Regulatory Impact
Analysis is required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires Agencies
to analyze the impact of rulemaking on small entities and consider
alternatives that would minimize any significant impacts on a
substantial number of small entities. Pursuant to that review, this
rule is certified not to have a significant 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 proposed rule does not contain Federal mandates (under the
regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) that impose costs on
State, local, or tribal governments or to the private sector of $100
million or more in any one year. This proposed rule is, therefore, not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Executive Order 12372
SNAP is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under
No. 10.551. For the reasons set forth in 2 CFR chapter IV, this Program
is excluded from 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. FNS has
considered the impact of this proposed rule on State and local
governments and has determined that this rulemaking does not have
federalism implications. This proposed 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 proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This proposed 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 proposed 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.
[[Page 66870]]
Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 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
rulemaking on the tribe or Indian tribal governments, or whether this
rulemaking may preempt tribal law. USDA did not receive any comments
specific to this proposed rule during the sessions. Reports from the
consultative sessions were made part of the USDA annual reporting on
Tribal Consultation and Collaboration. USDA offers consultation
opportunities, such as webinars and teleconferences, for collaborative
conversations with tribal leaders and their representatives concerning
ways to improve rules with regard to their effect on Indian country on
a quarterly basis as part of its yearly tribal consultation schedule.
We are unaware of any current tribal laws that could be in conflict
with the proposed rule. We request that commenters address any concerns
in this regard in their responses.
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 proposed
rule will not in any way limit or reduce the ability of protected
classes of individuals to receive SNAP benefits on the basis of their
race, color, national origin, sex, age, disability, religion or
political belief nor will it have a differential impact on minority
owned or operated business establishments, and woman owned or operated
business establishments that participate in SNAP.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chap. 35; see 5 CFR
1320) requires 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 proposed 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, 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.
List of Subjects in 7 Parts 271 and 274
Food stamps, Grant programs--social programs, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For reason set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR parts 271 and 274 are
proposed to be amended as follows:
SUBCHAPTER C--[AMENDED]
0
1. In the heading of subchapter C of chapter II, remove the words
``Food Stamp'' and add in their place the words ``Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance''.
0
2. The authority citation for 7 CFR parts 271 and 274 continues to read
as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2011-2036.
PART 271--GENERAL INFORMATION AND DEFINITIONS
Sec. 271.1 General purpose and scope.
0
3. In Sec. 271.1:
0
a. Revise paragraph (a);
0
b. Remove the word ``coupons'' from the fourth sentence of paragraph
(b) and add in its place ``SNAP benefits''; and
0
c. Remove the word ``coupon'' from the tenth sentence of paragraph (b)
and add in its place ``benefit''.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 271.1 General purpose and scope.
(a) Purpose of SNAP. In accordance with section 2 of the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008, SNAP is designed to promote the general welfare
and to safeguard the health and well being of the Nation's population
by raising the levels of nutrition among low-income households.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 271.2:
0
a. Amend the definition of Allotment by removing the word ``coupons''
and adding in its place the word ``benefits'';
0
b. Remove the definition of Authorization to participate card (ATP);
0
c. Add definitions for Benefit and Benefit issuer in alphabetical
order;
0
d. Remove the definition of Bulk storage point;
0
e. Add a definition for Contractor (or Contracted vendor) in
alphabetical order;
0
f. Remove the definitions of Coupon issuer and Direct access system;
0
g. Revise the definition of Drug addiction or alcoholic treatment and
rehabilitation program;
0
h. Add definitions for Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) account,
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card, and Electronic Benefit Transfer
(EBT) system in alphabetical order;
0
i. Amend the definition of Eligible foods by removing the word
``coupons'' where it appears twice in paragraph (3) of the definition,
and adding in its place the words ``SNAP benefits'';
0
j. Amend the definition of Employment and training (E&T) component by
removing ``6(d)(4)(B)(iv)'' and adding in its place ``6(d)(4)(B)'' and
by removing ``(7 U.S.C. 2014(2)(4)(B))'' and adding in its place ``(7
U.S.C. 2015(d)(4)(B))'';
0
k. Amend the definition of Employment and training (E&T) mandatory
participant by removing ``7 U.S.C. 2014(d)(1)'' and adding in its place
``7 U.S.C. 2015(d)(1)'';
0
l. Amend the definition of Firm's practice by removing the words ``food
coupons'' and adding in their place the words ``SNAP benefits'';
0
m. Add a definition for Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (Food and
Nutrition Act) in alphabetical order;
0
n. Revise the definition of Food Stamp Act;
0
o. Amend the definition of Identification (ID) card by removing the
words ``food coupons'' and adding in its place the words ``SNAP
benefits'';
0
p. Add definitions for Interoperability, Manual transaction, and Manual
voucher in alphabetical order;
0
q. Amend the definition of Overissuance by removing the word
``coupons'' and adding in its place the word ``benefits'';
0
r. Add definitions for Personal identification number (PIN), Point-of-
sale (POS) terminal, and Primary account number (PAN) in alphabetical
order;
0
s. Remove the definition of Program;
0
t. Add definitions for Retailer EBT Data Exchange (REDE) system and
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP or Program) in
alphabetical order.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 271.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
[[Page 66871]]
Benefit means the value of supplemental nutrition assistance
provided to a household by means of an EBT system or other means of
providing assistance, as determined by the Secretary.
Benefit issuer means any office of the State agency or any person,
partnership, corporation, organization, political subdivision or other
entity with which a State agency has contracted for, or to which it has
delegated functional responsibility, in connection with the issuance of
benefits to households.
* * * * *
Contractor (or contracted vendor) means an entity that is selected
to perform EBT-related services for the State agency.
* * * * *
Drug addiction or alcoholic treatment and rehabilitation program
means any drug addiction or alcoholic treatment and rehabilitation
program conducted by a private, nonprofit organization or institution,
or a publicly operated community mental health center and certified by
the requisite State title XIX Agency as:
(1) Receiving funding under part B of title XIX of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300x et seq.);
(2) Eligible to receive funding under part B of title XIX even if
it does not actually receive funding; or
(3) Operating to further the purposes of part B of title XIX, to
provide treatment to drug addicts and or alcoholics.
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) account means a set of records
containing demographic, card, benefit, transaction and balance data for
an individual household within the EBT system that is maintained and
managed by a State or its contractor as part of the client case record.
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card means an on-line magnetic
stripe card or off-line smart card issued to a household member or
authorized representative through the EBT system by a benefit issuer.
* * * * *
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) system means an electronic
payments system under which household benefits are issued from and
stored in a central databank, maintained and managed by a State or its
contractor, that uses electronic funds transfer and point-of-sale
technology for the delivery and control of food and other public
assistance benefits.
* * * * *
Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (Food and Nutrition Act) means title
7 of the United States Code, sections 2011 through 2036 (7 U.S.C. 2011-
2036), including any subsequent amendments thereto.
Food Stamp Act means the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-113) as
amended through Public Law 108-269, July 2, 2004.
* * * * *
Interoperability means a system that enables program benefits
issued via an EBT card to be redeemed outside the State that issued the
benefits.
* * * * *
Manual transaction means an EBT transaction that is processed with
the use of a paper manual voucher when there is an EBT system outage.
Manual voucher means a paper document signed by the EBT cardholder
that allows a retailer to redeem benefits through a manual transaction.
Personal Identification Number (PIN) means a numeric code selected
by or assigned to a household and used to verify the identity of an EBT
cardholder when performing an EBT transaction.
* * * * *
Point-of-Sale (POS) terminal means a range of devices deployed at
authorized retail food stores for redeeming benefits through the use of
an EBT card and PIN to initiate electronic debits and credits of
household EBT and retailer bank accounts.
Primary Account Number (PAN) means a number embossed or printed on
the EBT card and encoded onto the card to identify the State and EBT
account holder.
* * * * *
Retailer EBT Data Exchange (REDE) system means the FNS system that
allows the automated exchange of authorized retailer demographic data
between FNS and the State and/or EBT contractor for notification of
changes in retailer Program participation.
* * * * *
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP or Program) means
the program operated pursuant to the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008.
* * * * *
Sec. 271.4 [Amended]
0
5. In Sec. 271.4(a)(2) remove the word ``coupons'' and add in its
place ``SNAP benefits and EBT cards''.
Sec. 271.5 [Amended]
0
6. In Sec. 271.5:
0
a. Remove ``coupon'' and ``coupons'' wherever they appear and add in
their place ``benefit'' and ``benefits'', respectively, including the
section heading;
0
b. Amend paragraph (a) by adding ``and EBT cards'' at the end of the
last sentence;
0
c. Amend the introductory text of paragraph (b) by removing the word
``ATP'' and adding in its place the word ``EBT'';
0
d. Remove paragraphs (b)(1) through (3); and
0
e. Amend paragraph (c) by removing the word ``ATP's'' wherever they
appear and adding in its place the words ``EBT cards''.
PART 274--ISSUANCE AND USE OF BENEFITS
0
7. In Sec. 274.2:
0
a. Revise paragraph (c);
0
b. Amend paragraph (e)(1) by removing the words ``of paragraphs (e)
through (h)'';
0
c. Amend paragraph (g)(3) by removing the words ``paragraph (h)(3)''
and adding the words ``paragraph (i)'';
0
d. Revise paragraph (h);
0
e. Add paragraph (i).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 274.2 Providing benefits to participants.
* * * * *
(c) Benefit allotments. (1) State agencies shall not issue ongoing
monthly benefit allotments to a household in more than one issuance
during a month except with respect to the issuance of benefits to a
resident of a drug and alcohol treatment and rehabilitation program in
accordance with Sec. 273.11(e) of this chapter.
(2) For those households which are to receive a combined allotment,
the State agency shall provide the benefits for both months as an
aggregate (combined) allotment, or as two separate allotments, made
available at the same time in accordance with the timeframes specified
in Sec. 273.2 of this chapter.
* * * * *
(h) Inactive EBT accounts. An inactive EBT account means that the
household has not initiated activity that affects the balance of the
household's SNAP benefits in the account, such as a purchase or return,
for a minimum of six months.
(1) Off-line storage. If a household's EBT account is inactive for
six months or longer, State agencies may elect to store all benefits in
that account off-line.
(i) Off-line benefits are benefits that have been removed from the
EBT system for storage by the State agency and are no longer accessible
to the household unless and until the benefits are reinstated upon
contact by the household.
(ii) The State agency shall send written notification to the
household up to 10 days prior to or concurrent with the action to store
benefits off-line and
[[Page 66872]]
describe the steps necessary to bring the benefits back on-line. If an
inactive account has a zero balance, a notice to the household is not
required.
(iii) Benefits stored off-line that have not reached the 12-month
timeframe for expungement in accordance with paragraph (h)(2) of this
section shall be reinstated and made available within 48 hours of
reapplication or contact by the household.
(iv) Off-line benefits shall be removed from the Account Management
Agent system, making them unavailable to the household. Upon
reinstatement, the benefits shall be reissued and the account shall be
reactivated or a new account established to resume the benefit aging
process from the new issuance date.
(2) Expungement. On a daily basis, the State agency shall expunge
benefits from accounts that have been inactive for a period of 12
months in accordance with the following:
(i) When the oldest benefit allotment has not been accessed by the
household for 12 months, the State agency shall expunge benefits from
the EBT account or off-line storage at the monthly benefit allotment
level as each benefit allotment ages to 12 months since the date of
issuance or since the last date of account activity, whichever date is
later.
(ii) Expunged benefits shall be removed from the Account Management
Agent unless already removed as provided in paragraph (h)(1) of this
section, and shall not be reinstated.
(iii) The State agency shall not expunge any benefits from active
accounts even if there are benefit allotments older than 12 months. If
at any time after the expungement process begins, the household
initiates activity affecting the balance of the account, the State
shall stop expunging benefits from the account and start the account
aging process over again for the remaining benefits.
(iv) Notwithstanding the paragraph (h)(2)(iii) of this section, in
instances when the State agency verifies a death match for all
certified members of the household and closes the SNAP case in
accordance with Sec. 272.14 of this chapter, the State agency shall
expunge the remaining SNAP balance in the household's EBT account at
that time.
(i) Procedures to adjust SNAP accounts. Procedures shall be
established to permit the appropriate managers to adjust SNAP benefits
that have already been posted to an EBT account prior to the household
accessing the account; or to remove benefits from inactive accounts for
off-line storage or expungement in accordance with paragraph (h) of
this section.
(1) Whenever benefits are stored off-line or expunged, the State
agency shall document the date, amount of the benefits and storage
location in the household case file.
(2) Issuance reports shall reflect the adjustment to the State
agency issuance totals to comply with monthly issuance reporting
requirements prescribed under Sec. 274.4.
Dated: September 14, 2016.
Telora T. Dean,
Acting Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-22860 Filed 9-28-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P