Elimination of the Tribal Non-Federal Share Requirement, 24526-24535 [2023-07861]
Download as PDF
24526
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175, because the SIP revision
that EPA is proposing to disapprove
would not apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area
where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
as applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that EPA has
reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because this proposed SIP disapproval,
if finalized, will not in-and-of itself
create any new regulations, but will
simply disapprove certain State
requirements for inclusion in the SIP.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs
EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. EPA believes that this
action is not subject to the requirements
of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Apr 20, 2023
Jkt 259001
February 16, 1994) directs Federal
agencies to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on minority populations
and low-income populations to the
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) as the ‘‘fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect
to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further
defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ‘‘no group of people should bear a
disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’
The TCEQ did not evaluate EJ
considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation.
EPA performed an EJ analysis, as is
described above in the section titled,
‘‘Environmental Justice
Considerations.’’ The analysis was done
for the purpose of providing additional
context and information about this
rulemaking to the public, not as a basis
of the action. Due to the nature of the
action being taken here, this action is
expected to have a positive impact on
the air quality of the affected area. In
addition, there is no information in the
record upon which this decision is
based inconsistent with the stated goal
of E.O. 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for people of
color, low-income populations, and
Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 17, 2023.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2023–08498 Filed 4–20–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
45 CFR Parts 309 and 310
RIN 0970–AC99
Elimination of the Tribal Non-Federal
Share Requirement
Office of Child Support
Enforcement (OCSE), Administration for
Children and Families (ACF),
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
OCSE proposes to eliminate
the non-Federal share of program
expenditures requirement for Tribal
child support enforcement programs
including the 90/10 and 80/20 cost
sharing rates. Based upon the
experiences of and consultations with
Tribes and Tribal organizations, we
have determined that the non-Federal
share requirement limits growth, causes
disruptions, and creates instability.
DATES: Consideration will be given to
written comments on this notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) received
on or before June 20, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by [docket number and/or
Regulatory Information Number (RIN)
number], by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Written comments may be
submitted to: Office of Child Support
Enforcement, Attention: Director of
Policy and Training, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20201.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or RIN for this
rulemaking. All comments received will
be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chad Sawyer, Senior Policy Specialist,
OCSE Division of Policy and Training,
at ocse.dpt@acf.hhs.gov or (202) 774–
2323. Deaf and hearing impaired
individuals may call the Federal Dual
Party Relay Service at 1–800–877–8339
between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. Eastern Time.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Submission of Comments
Comments should be specific, address
issues raised by the proposed rule, and
explain reasons for any objections or
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules
recommended changes. Additionally,
we will be interested in comments that
indicate agreement with the proposal.
We will not acknowledge receipt of the
comments we receive. However, we will
review and consider all comments that
are germane and received during the
comment period. We will respond to
comments in the preamble to the final
rule.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Public Consultations
To obtain the broadest public
participation possible on the proposed
rule, OCSE conducted a combination
public face-to-face and virtual Tribal
Consultation on April 6, 2023. The
importance of consultation with Indian
Tribes was affirmed through
Presidential Memoranda in 1994, 2004,
2009, 2021, and 2022 and Executive
Order 13175 in 2000.
We published a Tribal Dear Colleague
Letter (TDCL–23–02) with the specific
location, date, and time of the
consultation, and disseminated notices
to all comprehensive and start-up Tribal
child support enforcement programs.
Additionally, OCSE collaborated with
the Administration for Children and
Families, Administration for Native
Americans, and National Association of
Tribal Child Support Directors to
disseminate the letter to Tribes and
Tribal organizations that do not have a
child support enforcement program.
At the consultation, Tribal leaders or
their designees in attendance made oral
presentations and/or provided written
comments for the record if they chose.
After the publication of the proposed
rule in the Fall 2022 Unified Agenda of
Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions,
OCSE received supportive written
comments from States and Tribal child
support enforcement programs.
We encouraged persons who made
oral presentations at the consultation to
also submit written comments in
support of their presentations.
Testimonies were recorded and will be
included in the public record of
comments on the proposed rule.
Prior Consultations
45 CFR 309.130(d) requires a Tribe or
Tribal organization 1 to provide a nonFederal share of program expenditures
in the amount of 10 percent during the
first 3 years of operation and 20 percent
during subsequent years. Since the
inception of the Tribal Child Support
Enforcement Program, Tribes and Tribal
organizations have submitted oral and
written feedback, testimony, and
blanket waiver requests regarding the
1 See 45 CFR 309.05 for the definition of Tribe
and Tribal organization.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Apr 20, 2023
Jkt 259001
non-Federal share requirement and cost
sharing rates. The non-Federal share
requirement and rates have been
longstanding issues discussed at Tribal
Consultations and OCSE listening
sessions with Tribal child support
directors.
In August 2011, one Tribe submitted
testimony at the ACF Tribal
Consultation regarding the non-Federal
share requirement. The Tribe expressed
that the cost sharing requirement was
unreasonable since they had no land
base, virtually no resources to provide
any financial profit, and no taxable
income to use for the non-Federal share.
In the March 2012 ACF Tribal
Consultation, another Tribe provided
comments that they lacked a land base
to meet the non-Federal share
requirement. In April 2019, three Tribes
and the National Association of Tribal
Child Support Directors submitted
testimony at the HHS Tribal Budget
Consultation and requested consultation
on the non-Federal share requirement.
In September 2019, the non-Federal
share requirement was on the 2019 ACF
Tribal Consultation agenda. During the
2019 ACF Tribal Consultation, 20 Tribes
provided testimony discussing the
challenges they encounter in providing
20 percent of the approved and
allowable program expenditures every
fiscal year (FY). They described how the
requirement limits growth, causes
disruptions, and creates instability in
their child support enforcement
programs. For example, they mentioned
competing with other Tribal
departments for limited resources to
operate their programs and having to
make difficult budget and service
reductions, despite the complex and
growing needs of their communities.
The 2019 ACF consultation also
included Tribal written testimony
requesting the repeal of the non-Federal
share requirement. During the 2020 ACF
Tribal Consultation, 2021 HHS Regional
Consultation, and 2021 HHS Tribal
Budget Consultation, Tribes continued
to discuss their problems with meeting
the non-Federal share, reiterate their
request for an expedited resolution, and
recommend the elimination of the nonFederal share requirement.
In addition to Tribal Consultations,
OCSE conducted many virtual and inperson listening sessions with Tribal
child support enforcement programs,
held separately or in conjunction with
Tribal child support enforcement
conferences or association meetings. At
these sessions, Tribes and Tribal
organizations described the difficulties
of providing the non-Federal share
through cash or in-kind contributions
during the first 3 years and thereafter.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24527
The issue of meeting the non-Federal
share has also been raised multiple
times at the ACF Tribal Advisory
Committee meetings. Tribal leaders
have asked for the elimination of the
non-Federal share requirement during
these meetings.
OCSE received several requests for
blanket waivers of the non-Federal share
of program expenditures that were
beyond the waiver authority under 45
CFR 309.130(e). In 2016, 10 Tribes
submitted a request for a blanket waiver
based on the Tribal waiver provision in
the HHS Tribal Consultation Policy.
Also, in 2016, the National Association
of Tribal Child Support Directors and
the National Tribal Child Support
Association submitted separate but
similar letters to OCSE requesting a
blanket waiver for the same reasons
discussed in the Tribal requests. The 12
blanket waiver requests indicated that
the non-Federal share requirement was
disruptive and posed hardships. The
requests also indicated that the nonFederal share requirement did not
adequately reflect consultation,
circumstances unique to Tribal
communities, or authorizing statute that
permits funding for Tribal child support
enforcement programs. Specifically,
they argued that section 455(f) of the
Social Security Act (the Act) does not
impose a match requirement and,
therefore, OCSE should not impose one
through regulation. Most recently, in FY
2022, a Tribe requested a blanket waiver
for their child support program and for
other programs based on the waiver
flexibilities contained in Executive
Order 13132.
OCSE denied all the blanket waiver
requests of the non-Federal share of
program expenditures in accordance
with 45 CFR 309.130(e). Section
309.130(e) describes the circumstances
and criteria for requesting a temporary
waiver of the non-Federal share
requirement. This regulation is binding
on OCSE and does not permit blanket
waivers. The Tribal waiver provisions
under the HHS Tribal Consultation
Policy and Executive Order 13132 are
limited ‘‘to the extent practicable and
permitted by law.’’ Given this
limitation, OCSE had no authority to
grant blanket waivers.
Statutory Authority
This NPRM is published in
accordance with section 455(f) of the
Social Security Act (the Act) (42 U.S.C.
655(f)). Section 455(f) of the Act
requires the Secretary to issue
regulations governing the grants to
Tribes and Tribal organizations
operating child support enforcement
programs.
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
24528
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
This proposed rule is also published
under the authority granted to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services
by section 1102 of the Act (42 U.S.C.
1302). Section 1102 of the Act
authorizes the Secretary to publish
regulations, not inconsistent with the
Act, as may be necessary for the
efficient administration of the functions
with which the Secretary is responsible
under the Act.
Background
The Child Support Enforcement
Program was established in 1975 under
Title IV–D of the Social Security Act. It
functions in all states and several Tribes
and territories. State and Tribal child
support enforcement programs locate
noncustodial parents, establish
paternity, establish and enforce support
orders, modify orders when appropriate,
collect and distribute child support
payments, and refer parents to other
services. They help to ensure that
noncustodial parents provide financial
support for their children. Child support
payments play an important role in
reducing child poverty, lifting nearly
three-quarters of a million families out
of poverty in 2017.2
Prior to the enactment of the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996
(Pub. L. 104–193), title IV–D of the Act
did not include direct funding for Tribes
and Tribal organizations seeking to
operate their own child support
enforcement programs. Indirect Federal
funding was available for a Tribe or
Tribal organization that entered into
cooperative agreements with a state and
the state delegated functions of their
child support program to the Tribe or
Tribal organization. PRWORA amended
section 455(f) of the Act and authorized
the Secretary to provide direct funding
to Tribes and Tribal organizations to
operate child support enforcement
programs under title IV–D and to
promulgate implementing regulations.
Implementing regulations are contained
in 45 CFR parts 309 and 310.
On August 21, 2000, OCSE published
the NPRM for the Tribal Child Support
Enforcement Program (65 FR 50800).
Prior to publishing the NPRM, OCSE
conducted numerous consultations,
including a series of six Nation-toNation consultations with Tribes, Tribal
organizations, and other interested
parties across the country (65 FR
50804). OCSE also set up a toll free
‘‘800’’ number to allow for additional
2 See Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation, Fact Sheet: Approaches for engaging
fathers in child support programs (October 2021),
available at https://aspe.hhs.gov/reports/fatherengagement-child-support.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Apr 20, 2023
Jkt 259001
comments and input by Tribes and
solicited further input from previous
consultation participants to help OCSE
understand the issues raised during the
consultation process.
The NPRM proposed requirements
that Tribes and Tribal organizations
must meet to be eligible for title IV–D
funding and provided guidance on how
they could apply for and, upon
approval, receive direct funding for the
operation of their child support program
(65 FR 50800). Based upon Tribal
recommendations during the
consultations, OCSE used the state child
support enforcement program as a
model but eased the technical
requirements applicable to the states in
recognition of the unique circumstances
of Tribes and Tribal organizations (65
FR 50804). As such, the NPRM included
a substantially lower cost sharing rate
than is required of the states under title
IV–D (65 FR 50823).
The NPRM stated that OCSE
considered several different funding
approaches that controlled costs,
including performance-based funding,
funding based on cost per child to
operate the program, capping certain
costs, and state-cost based funding (65
FR 50823). OCSE engaged in extensive
deliberations over the issue of funding
for Tribal child support enforcement
programs. After careful consideration of
the advantages and disadvantages of
each cost control funding approach,
ultimately, the Secretary proposed
open-ended funding with a Tribal match
(65 FR 50823). The NPRM proposed that
Tribes and Tribal organizations provide
a 10 percent match during the start-up
period and first 3 years of operation,
with the match increasing to 20 percent
thereafter (65 FR 50823). The NPRM
also included a waiver provision
allowing the Secretary to waive the nonFederal share for Tribes and Tribal
organizations that lacked sufficient
resources and met certain specific
criteria (65 FR 50823). Additionally, the
NPRM indicated that ‘‘if the Secretary
determines based on experience and
consultation with Tribes that the 80/20
match rate is disruptive to the program
and imposes hardship to Tribes, the
regulations will be revised accordingly’’
(65 FR 50823).
The Tribal Child Support
Enforcement Program final rule was
promulgated on March 30, 2004
(hereinafter final rule) and included a
revised cost sharing provision (69 FR
16638). In the final rule, OCSE indicated
that it received numerous comments
from Tribes objecting to the cost sharing
requirement. In response, OCSE again
expressed concern regarding the control
of costs in the Tribal child support
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
enforcement program, stating that
‘‘unlike other Tribal grant programs, the
funding for Tribal IV–D programs are
not sum certain grants,’’ meaning a
specified and set amount of funds (69
FR 16667). OCSE further stated that the
cost sharing requirement was
maintained after determining ‘‘that a
non-Federal share in expenditures is
necessary, based on the principle that
better programs and better management
result when local resources are
invested’’ (69 FR 16667). However, in
response to comments, the match
requirement was changed to allow 100
percent funding during the start-up
period, not to exceed 2 years, and,
capped at $500,000 per 45 CFR
309.130(c)(1). OCSE noted that the nonFederal match for start-up costs was
eliminated in recognition that ‘‘Tribes
just beginning title IV–D child support
enforcement may have very limited
funds for this activity’’ (69 FR 16646).
In accordance with 45 CFR 309.10(a)
and (b), to apply for and receive Federal
funding to operate a Tribal child
support enforcement program, a Tribe or
Tribal organization must have at least
100 children under the age of majority
as defined by Tribal law or code, in the
population subject to the jurisdiction of
the Tribal court or administrative
agency. The age of majority is the age at
which a person is considered an adult,
which is typically 18 years old. The
requirement to have at least 100
children under the age of 18 years old
helps to ensure that Tribes and Tribal
organizations will have enough
potential child support cases to be cost
effective. However, 45 CFR 309.10(c)
permits a waiver of this requirement
when a Tribe or Tribal organizations
submits a request with the required
information demonstrating that it can
provide the services required under 45
CFR part 309 in a cost-effective manner
even though the population subject to
Tribal jurisdiction includes fewer than
100 children.
The Tribal child support enforcement
program regulation permits Federal
funding in two ways. When Tribes or
Tribal organizations do not meet the
regulatory requirements to operate a
child support enforcement program,
they may apply for start-up funding in
accordance with 45 CFR 309.16. Startup funding enables Tribes and Tribal
organizations with the basic
governmental and administrative
capabilities to work towards meeting the
requirements to operate a child support
enforcement program in accordance
with the regulation. The start-up
application must include a program
development plan, detailing the specific
steps a Tribe or Tribal organization will
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules
take to become compliant with the
requirements of 45 CFR 309.65(a), and
the timeframe associated with each step.
Federal funding for start-up costs is
limited to $500,000, which must be
used within two years after the first day
of the quarter after the start-up
application was approved, in
accordance with 45 CFR 309.16(c).
When Tribes or Tribal organizations
determine that they meet the regulatory
requirements to operate a child support
enforcement program, they may apply
for comprehensive funding in
accordance with 45 CFR 309.15. The
application must include a Tribal IV–D
plan that demonstrates compliance with
the 14 required elements described in
45 CFR 309.65(a). For example, a Tribe
must have procedures to accept all
applications, safeguard personal and
confidential information, and locate
noncustodial parents and their assets.
During the first 3 years of operating a
child support program, Tribes or Tribal
organizations receive Federal grant
funds equal to 90 percent of the total
amount of approved and allowable
expenditures, in accordance with 45
CFR 309.130(c)(2). During the fourth
year and subsequent years, Tribes or
Tribal organizations receive Federal
grant funds equal to 80 percent of the
total amount of approved and allowable
expenditures, in accordance with 45
CFR 309.130(c)(3). Tribes and Tribal
organizations must provide the nonFederal share of program expenditures,
either 10 percent or 20 percent, with
cash or in-kind contributions pursuant
to 45 CFR 309.130(d).
45 CFR 309.130(e) permits, under
certain circumstances, a temporary
waiver of part or all of the non-Federal
share of program expenditures. This
provision includes two types of
temporary waiver requests that a Tribe
or Tribal organization may submit for
consideration: ‘‘anticipated temporary
waiver request’’ and ‘‘emergency waiver
request.’’ Both waiver requests must be
submitted in accordance with the
procedures specified in 45 CFR
309.130(e)(2) through (4). These
procedures require the submission of
extensive information and
documentation to demonstrate the
temporary lack of resources and justify
the waiver request.
Under 45 CFR 309.130(e)(1)(i), when
Tribes or Tribal organizations anticipate
that they will be temporarily unable to
contribute part or all of the required
non-Federal share of program funding,
they must submit an anticipated
temporary waiver request. The
anticipated waiver, due no later than 60
days before the start of the funding
period, is more restrictive because
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Apr 20, 2023
Jkt 259001
untimely or incomplete requests will
not be considered, in accordance with
45 CFR 309.130(e)(1)(i). Many Tribal
child support enforcement programs
have been denied anticipated waivers
because of untimely or incomplete
requests. An untimely anticipated
waiver request means a Tribe submitted
the request after the deadline of August
1 pursuant to 45 CFR 309.130(e)(1)(i).
An incomplete anticipated waiver
request means a Tribe did not include
all the information required by 45 CFR
309.130(e)(2) through (4), such as
portions of the Tribal budget sufficient
to demonstrate the extent of the funding
shortfall and uncommitted funds.
Under 45 CFR 309.130(e)(1)(ii), after
the start of the funding period, if an
emergency situation occurs, such as a
hurricane or flood, that warrants a
waiver of the non-Federal share of
program expenditures, Tribes or Tribal
organizations may submit an emergency
waiver request. Over the years, the
emergency waiver has been requested
more frequently than the anticipated
waiver for a number of reasons, most
recently due to natural disasters and
public health emergencies.
Justification
The purpose of this proposed rule is
to eliminate the non-Federal share
requirement for Tribal child support
enforcement programs because it limits
growth, causes disruptions, and creates
instability. The proposed rule reflects
OCSE’s comment in the 2000 NPRM
that the matching requirement would be
revised accordingly if the Secretary
determines, based on experience gained
through operations of Tribal child
support enforcement programs and
consultation with Tribes, that the 80/20
match rate is disruptive to the program
and imposes hardship to Tribes (65 FR
50823). The proposed rule also responds
to feedback and recommendations
submitted during Tribal Consultations
and OCSE listening sessions about the
hardship of meeting the non-Federal
share requirement.
Tribal child support enforcement
programs are beneficial for Tribal
Nations, particularly given their ability
to provide services to families in a
manner that is consistent with tribal
values and cultures. For example, Tribes
or Tribal organizations exercise their
sovereignty over their members, ensure
parental responsibility, increase family
disposable income, incorporate Tribal
culture and traditions, offer unique
services like non-cash support, and
reduce the need for other supportive
services such as Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families (TANF). In FY 2021,
Tribal child support enforcement
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24529
programs collected $53 million in child
support payments and 97 percent went
to families.3 Native American children
in Tribal areas with child support
enforcement programs are in great need
of child support, especially since 53
percent of Native American children in
these areas lived in single-parent
families.4 According to data from the
2015 American Community Survey,
nearly one-third of Native Americans
living in Tribal areas with a child
support program lived below the
poverty line in 2015 (that year, the
poverty line for a family of three was
$20,090).5 This poverty rate was more
than twice the poverty rate for
Americans in general (15 percent).
Particularly stark is the poverty rate
among Native American children living
in these areas, which was 40 percent.6
Tribal child support enforcement
programs are also beneficial for states,
specifically in enforcing state child
support orders and collecting child
support payments in intergovernmental
cases. 45 CFR 309.120(a) requires a
Tribal child support enforcement
program to extend the full range of
services to respond to all requests from,
and cooperate with, state and other
Tribal child support enforcement
programs. This includes recognizing
and enforcing child support orders
issued by a state or another Tribe or
Tribal organization, in accordance with
45 CFR 309.120(b). For example, when
a Tribal child support enforcement
program receives a request for assistance
from a state, they register the state child
support order in Tribal court and
enforce it. Then the Tribe collects the
child support payment from the
noncustodial parent and sends it to the
state in accordance with 45 CFR
309.115(d). Without this assistance from
Tribal child support enforcement
programs, states are, for the most part,
unable to collect child support
payments because they lack jurisdiction
to enforce their child support orders in
Tribal Nations. In FY 2021, Tribal child
support enforcement programs collected
and sent $11 million in child support
3 See OCSE 2021 Tribal Infographic at https://
www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/
ocse/tribal_infographic_2021.pdf.
4 See OCSE Exploring Tribal Demographic Data:
Part Two at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/css/
ocsedatablog/2023/01/exploring-tribaldemographic-data-part-two.
5 See OCSE Exploring Tribal Demographic Data:
Part One at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/css/
ocsedatablog/2022/11/exploring-tribaldemographic-data-part-one.
6 Id.
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
24530
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
payments to states, other Tribes, and
countries.7
Yet, to date, few Tribes and Tribal
organizations operate child support
enforcement programs, although
funding was authorized 18 years ago.
Out of the 574 federally recognized
Tribes, only 60 operate Tribal child
support enforcement programs despite
the flexible eligibility requirements to
receive program funding.8 A majority of
the Tribal child support enforcement
programs were established between
2008 and 2014. In the past 5 years, only
one Tribal child support enforcement
program was established. Currently,
there is only one Tribe in the start-up
phase, completing the necessary work to
meet the regulatory requirements to
operate a Tribal child support
enforcement program. OCSE has heard
that the non-Federal share requirement
is a major barrier preventing Tribes and
Tribal organizations from applying for
program funding, despite the need for
Tribal child support enforcement
services. For example, during the 2019
ACF Tribal Consultation, one Tribe
testified that they had been considering
adding a child support program;
however, hearing all the testimony with
concerns about the non-Federal share
requirement dissuaded them from
starting one. This testimony mirrors
comments OCSE staff have heard from
prospective Tribes during presentations
or conversations about the Tribal child
support enforcement program.
Many Tribes and Tribal organizations
face systemic, historical, and ongoing
issues that impact their ability to meet
the non-Federal share.9 For example,
some Tribes have high rates of
unemployment and families living
below the poverty level, have limited
and vulnerable Tribal enterprises that
generate revenue, are in rural
underdeveloped communities, are
exposed to greater environmental
threats, and lack robust economies. In
fact, 45 CFR 309.130(e)(4) includes
some of these same issues that impact
a Tribe’s ability to meet the non-Federal
share and support a request to waive
this requirement. Additionally, most
Tribal child support directors have
indicated that they often compete with
other Tribal departments and programs
to obtain limited Tribal government
7 See OCSE 2021 Tribal Infographic at https://
www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/
ocse/tribal_infographic_2021.pdf.
8 See U.S. Department of Interior Indian Affairs
Tribal Leader Directory at https://www.bia.gov/
service/tribal-leaders-directory.
9 See U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Broken
Promises: Continuing Federal Funding Shortfall for
Native Americans (December 2018), available at
https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/12-20Broken-Promises.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Apr 20, 2023
Jkt 259001
funding. Economic downturns and
disasters in Tribal Nations reduce these
limited government funds even further
and force Tribal officials to make tough
decisions about how to allocate and use
funds and resources. These issues, at
least in part, make the non-Federal
match too burdensome.
Federal laws regarding real property
exacerbate the burden by restricting
how Tribes and Tribal organizations can
claim Tribally owned property as part of
their non-Federal share of program
expenditures. Many Tribal child
support enforcement programs are
housed in Tribally owned property.
When an entity owns a building and/or
office space and it is claimed or
contributed to the award, 45 CFR 75.436
requires that the building and/or office
space must be valued using
depreciation, whether claimed as an
administrative cost or for cost sharing
purposes. Depreciation must be
computed in accordance with 45 CFR
75.436(d). This means that the Tribal
property cannot be assessed at the fair
market value as if the Tribal child
support enforcement program is renting
or leasing it. As such, Tribal child
support enforcement programs claim
depreciation, maintenance, and
insurance (OCSE–IM–20–05). For these
Tribes, using depreciated value may be
substantially less than using fair market
value for a tribally owned property or
office space.
Even if a Tribe or Tribal organization
operates a child support enforcement
program, the non-Federal match
requires the program be limited in other
ways, which negatively impacts
vulnerable Tribal families and children.
Meeting the non-Federal share
disproportionately drives programmatic
and fiscal decisions. For example, most
Tribal child support enforcement
programs use incurred cost from Tribal
court personnel who process child
support cases as part of their
contribution toward the non-Federal
share. The number of such cases
fluctuates and relies on parents
attending court hearings, which may
pose a burden on parents with low
incomes, transportation challenges, or
disabilities. Most Tribal child support
directors have indicated that they had to
defer filling vacancies, performing
automation or system upgrades, and
paying for required security assessments
to access the Federal Parent Locator
Service, which helps in locating
noncustodial parents and their assets.
Some Tribal child support directors
have also indicated that they have
delayed acquiring any system
automation due to the cost and
subsequently their proportionate non-
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Federal share and are, instead, using
Microsoft tools such as Word and Excel
to manage their caseloads. As a result,
many Tribal child support enforcement
programs struggle to operate with
resource deficits.
These resource deficits prevent some
Tribal programs from expanding beyond
the delivery of core child support
services, such as establishing paternity
and locating noncustodial parents and
their assets. Many cannot provide
intensive case management for lowincome noncustodial parents due to
staffing shortages. Intensive case
management is used to identify barriers
to paying child support, make
appropriate referrals, monitor
compliance and outcomes, and
collaborate with other social service
programs to ensure noncustodial
parents receive services that help them
become responsible parents and pay
consistent and reliable child support.
Many also lack the resources to pursue
discretionary, competitive grant
opportunities awarded under section
1115 of the Act, which promote
innovation and research. Using funds
from section 1115(a) of the Act, OCSE
offers grant opportunities periodically,
based on available funding each year, to
state and Tribal child support
enforcement programs, or their state
umbrella agencies. Section 1115
demonstration grants must be used for
research and to improve the child
support enforcement program. Each
funding opportunity is unique, and
applications must respond to the
outlined project goals and requirements
in the announcement.
During Tribal Consultations and
listening sessions, many Tribal child
support enforcement programs have
expressed their fears about closing their
child support program because they
cannot provide the required non-Federal
share. When a Tribe cannot afford the
non-Federal share and does not obtain
a waiver of this requirement, they do
not receive any Federal funds to operate
their child support enforcement
program. Consequently, they are forced
to close their program and may refer
their Tribal parents to another Tribe for
child support services. In FY 2017, a
Tribe closed their child support
enforcement program because they were
unable to meet the non-Federal share of
program expenditures. In the Tribe’s
letter regarding the closure of their
program, they shared that the match
contribution for a Tribal child support
enforcement program is a barrier for any
Tribe to be successful. In the FYs 2020,
2021, and 2022 waiver requests, most
Tribes and Tribal organizations
indicated they were in jeopardy of
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules
shutting down without a waiver of part
or all of the required non-Federal share.
They indicated that they were unclear
when Tribal enterprises, which were
already vulnerable before the economic
downturn, would recover and generate
enough revenue to help them meet the
non-Federal share. Additionally,
although 45 CFR 309.75(e) permits
Tribal child support enforcement
programs to charge an application fee or
recover costs, most Tribes and Tribal
organizations do not charge fees or
recover costs since many Tribal families
are low income. Therefore, they do not
generate program income that could be
used for the non-Federal share.
Temporary waivers of the non-Federal
share of program expenditures do not
provide a sufficient or permanent
solution. Although 45 CFR 309.130(e)(4)
identifies issues faced by most Tribes
and Tribal organizations, such as little
or no economic development, it also
requires documentary evidence to
support statements about how these
issues impact meeting the non-Federal
share. Meeting these requirements in
annual applications for a waiver due to
intractable economic reasons or for
unforeseen emergencies imposes a
significant administrative and
paperwork burden for Tribal child
support enforcement programs. It
requires Tribes and Tribal organizations
to redirect time and resources away
from administering their programs and
meeting the pressing needs of their
communities when they are often
already under resourced. Over the years,
many Tribal child support enforcement
programs have indicated that they have
not applied for a waiver due to the
extensive submission procedures, which
act as barriers to accessing relief. In
response, Tribes submitted blanket
waiver requests, as indicated
previously, to make these waivers of the
non-Federal share more accessible and
effective over multiple fiscal years.
Until recently, OCSE received and
approved very few waiver requests. For
example, between FYs 2016 and 2019,
OCSE granted 10 waivers of the nonFederal share. Beginning in 2020 due to
the declared national public health
emergency for the COVID–19 pandemic,
OCSE provided flexibilities for
emergency waiver submissions, which
encouraged more Tribes and Tribal
organizations to apply. Under the
pandemic flexibilities, OCSE
understood that Tribal child support
enforcement programs were unable to
provide a portion of their Tribal budget
or make attempts to secure the
necessary funds and in-kind
contributions from other sources in
accordance with 45 CFR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Apr 20, 2023
Jkt 259001
309.130(e)(2)(iii) and (v). As a result,
OCSE approved waivers in larger
numbers: 31 in FY 2020, 27 in FY 2021,
and 12 in FY 2022. The emergency
waiver flexibilities will end when the
COVID–19 Public Health Emergency
ends on May 11, 2023 (see OCSE–DCL–
23–04). But the need for these waivers
was not just due to the pandemic.
Instead, the pandemic exacerbated and
highlighted longstanding difficulties
with meeting the non-Federal share.
Tribes and Tribal organizations may be
unable to overcome the procedural
barriers to apply for and receive a
waiver and may have to terminate their
child support enforcement program if
they are unable to provide the nonFederal share or receive a waiver.
Eliminating the non-Federal share will
provide a permanent solution to the
administrative burdens, access barriers,
and limited effect of the temporary
waivers.
Waiver requests also impose an
administrative burden on OCSE,
without providing a long-term solution.
By eliminating the non-Federal share
requirement, OCSE can better use its
expertise, resources, and efforts to build
collaborative, government-togovernment relationships with Tribes
and Tribal organizations to foster
innovation, engage in human centered
design projects, and focus on topics that
advance program priorities and improve
outcomes for recipients of Tribal child
support enforcement services.
Although OCSE previously
determined during drafting of the Tribal
Child Support Enforcement Program
regulations that a non-Federal match
was important to ensure ‘‘better
programs and better management’’ (69
FR 16667), it has now reconsidered that
conclusion after seeing the Tribal child
support enforcement program in
practice during the past two decades.
Based on its experience, OCSE now
concludes that its oversight tools are
sufficient, without the non-Federal
share match, to monitor use of funds for
IV–D expenditures and consider cost
containment. The Tribes show in their
budget submissions and
communications with OCSE that they
are engaged in operating successful
programs and using Federal funds
properly, efficiently, and effectively, in
accordance with 45 CFR 309.60(b). The
primary method for evaluating and
ensuring allowable and appropriate
costs is through the budget submission,
review, and approval process. 45 CFR
309.15(c) requires Tribal child support
enforcement programs to submit a
budget to receive Title IV–D funding to
administer their child support
enforcement programs. Budgets must
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24531
include the detailed information
specified in 45 CFR 309.130(b) and
OCSE guidance, such as quarterly
estimate of expenditures, narrative
justification for each cost category, and
copies of contracts (see Tribal Child
Support Budget Toolbox and OCSE
PIQT–21–01).10 OCSE and OGM review
Tribal budget submissions for
compliance with 45 CFR parts 309, 310,
75, and other applicable Federal laws.
During the review of Tribal budgets,
OCSE and OGM examine the estimates
of program expenditures, determine
whether the budget narratives and
documentation justify costs, and
approve allowable costs charged to the
Title IV–D grant before awarding funds.
OCSE reviews the entire budget in detail
to ensure the costs are reasonable and
necessary given the caseload size and
other demographic and geographic
factors. OCSE compares contract costs to
industry standards and similar contracts
from other child support enforcement
programs. For questionable costs, OCSE
works with the Tribe to obtain
additional information or revise or
remove those costs when warranted. For
example, OCSE determined that a
Tribe’s contract costs for information
technology development were higher
than the industry standard and worked
with the Tribe to secure a reduction in
the costs before approving the contract.
45 CFR 309.145 describes the
allowable costs for Tribal child support
enforcement programs and requires
such costs to be reasonable, necessary,
and allocable to the program. 45 CFR
309.130(h) mandates compliance with
45 CFR part 75, which describes the
uniform administrative requirements
and cost principles. 45 CFR 75.403
through 75.405 provide specific
requirements for determining whether
costs are allowable, reasonable, and
allocable. Since OCSE must approve a
Tribe’s budget before OGM issues a
notice of grant award, OCSE has direct
oversight over Tribal expenditures
before Tribal child support enforcement
programs drawdown and use Title IV–
D funds at the start of the fiscal year.
After OCSE approves a Tribe’s budget,
a Tribe may request additional funds by
submitting the information specified in
45 CFR 309.130(f)(1). If the increase in
funds impacts the Tribal IV–D plan, the
Tribe must also submit a plan
amendment in accordance with 45 CFR
309.130(f)(2). A Tribe must provide the
required information and
documentation and the costs must
10 See the optional Tribal Budget and Justification
Narrative Template at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/
sites/default/files/documents/ocse/Tribal_budget_
justification_narrative_template.docx.
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
24532
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules
comply with the Federal regulations
before OCSE approves the request for an
increase in funds. This ensures that
increases in approved Tribal budgets are
reasonable, necessary, allowable, and
appropriate.
Additionally, OCSE uses a variety of
technical assistance methods to assess
needs and provide support to Tribes on
the uniform grant requirements and cost
principles. When reviewing Tribal
budgets, OCSE analyzes issues and
trends in expenditures and uses that
information to deliver training and to
ensure funds are used efficiently and
effectively for all parties. OCSE also
provides annual and tailored training
and technical assistance about Tribal
budget and grant requirements during
site visits, regional meetings, national
webinars, and conferences. Site visits
help OCSE to obtain and understand
information about how Tribes and
Tribal organizations use Title IV–D
funds to operate and administer their
Tribal child support enforcement
programs. OCSE regional office staff
work closely with Tribal child support
staff to answer questions, share best
practices, review budgets and grant
reports, and monitor the administration
and performance of Tribal child support
enforcement programs.
As evidenced by years of Federal
review, Tribes and Tribal organizations
have demonstrated the importance of
spending Federal grant funds prudently,
efficiently, and effectively. Tribes are
invested in helping noncustodial and
custodial parents support their children
financially and emotionally.
Accordingly, OCSE is now of the view
that Tribes and Tribal organizations will
continue to provide Tribal resources,
such as Tribally owned building or
office space, to ensure the success of
their Tribal child support enforcement
programs—even in the absence of a
mandatory non-Federal match. The
Tribal child support enforcement
program regulations provide OCSE with
sufficient authority to control costs and
monitor compliance without the nonFederal share requirement. As a result,
the overall Tribal child support
enforcement program expenditures of
existing Tribes will not rise
substantially beyond normal cost
increases due to factors like inflation,
filling vacancies, or upgrading
equipment and systems. The impact to
the Federal budget will be modest.
Even with the elimination of the nonFederal share, OCSE does not expect
that every federally recognized Tribe or
Tribal organization will request funding
to operate a Tribal child support
enforcement program, meaning that
OCSE expects only a modest and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Apr 20, 2023
Jkt 259001
gradual increase in program
expenditures. Prospective Tribes and
Tribal organizations may not have the
needed administrative capacity or
infrastructure to operate a child support
enforcement program. They may not
have 100 children under the age of
majority. Although they may request a
waiver of this requirement (45 CFR
309.10(c)), the waiver must demonstrate
that their prospective Tribal child
support enforcement program will be
cost effective (45 CFR 309.10(c)(1)(iii)).
Additionally, prospective Tribes and
Tribal organizations may not want to
comply with the extensive requirements
and procedures required to receive
funding (45 CFR 309.65). A Tribal court
can hear child support cases without the
Tribe administering a child support
enforcement program. Administering a
Tribal child support enforcement
program and working with parents on
such a vulnerable and sensitive subject
is complex and demanding. Instead of
operating their own Tribal child support
enforcement program, they may jointly
operate a program or may receive child
support services from an existing Tribal
child support enforcement program. In
sum, and for the reasons discussed
above, OSCE projects the number of
new Tribal child support enforcement
programs to grow modestly before
plateauing, thus preventing a dramatic
increase in Federal costs. And any such
increase in Federal costs is offset by the
benefits that this proposed rule would
provide in helping to prevent existing
Tribal child support enforcement
programs from closing and provide a
permanent solution to the problems
related to the non-Federal share
requirement. However, even if
eliminating the non-Federal share
results in many more Tribes and Tribal
organizations applying for and receiving
approval to operate a child support
enforcement program, Tribal
participation in this program is, in fact,
what Congress intended when it
authorized funding under PRWORA.
This will ensure the opportunity for
Tribal families to receive child support
enforcement services that reflect and
affirm their Tribal cultures and
traditions, create financial stability, and
family economic well-being to help lift
Tribal families out of poverty.
Section-By-Section Discussion of the
Provisions of This Proposed Rule
This NPRM proposes to eliminate the
non-Federal share for Tribal child
support enforcement programs. The
following is a discussion of the
regulatory provisions included in this
NPRM.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Section 309.15 What is a Tribal IV–D
program application?
In § 309.15(a)(2)(iii), we propose
removing the language ‘‘; and either:’’ at
the end of that provision and inserting
a ‘‘.’’ in their place. Section
309.15(a)(2)(iv) requires the initial
application for funding to include a
statement that the Tribe or Tribal
organization has or will have the nonFederal share of program expenditures
available. Section 309.15(a)(2)(v)
permits a request for a waiver of the
non-Federal share in accordance with
§ 309.130(e). We propose removing
§ 309.15(a)(2)(iv) and (v) due to the
elimination of the non-Federal share.
Section 309.45 When and how may a
Tribe or Tribal organization request
reconsideration of a disapproval action?
Section 309.45(g) indicates that
disapproval of start-up funding, a
request for waiver of the 100-child rule,
and a request for waiver of the nonFederal Tribal share is not subject to
administrative appeal. We propose
amending § 309.45(g) by removing ‘‘,
and a request for waiver of the nonFederal Tribal share.’’ Revised
paragraph (g) will read as follows:
‘‘Disapproval of start-up funding and a
request for waiver of the 100-child rule
is not subject to administrative appeal.’’
Section 309.75 What administrative
and management procedures must a
Tribe or Tribal organization include in
a Tribal IV–D plan?
Section 309.75(e) describes the
requirements for a Tribe and Tribal
organization that intends to charge an
application fee or recover costs in
excess of the fee. Collected fees and
recovered costs are considered program
income and deducted from total
allowable costs in accordance with 45
CFR 309.75(e)(4) and 45 CFR
75.307(e)(1). Due to the proposed
elimination of the non-Federal share
requirement, we propose revising
§ 309.75(e) to require Tribal child
support enforcement programs to have
procedures that prohibit charging fees
and recovering costs and to remove
paragraphs (e)(1) through (4).
Section 309.85 What records must a
Tribe or Tribal organization agree to
maintain in a Tribal IV–D plan?
Section 309.85(a)(6) requires a Tribe
or Tribal organization to maintain
records on any fees charged and
collected, if applicable. As previously
stated, collected fees and recovered
costs are considered program income
and deducted from total allowable costs
in accordance with 45 CFR 309.75(e)(4)
and 45 CFR 75.307(e)(1). Due to the
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules
proposed elimination of the non-Federal
share requirement, we propose
removing § 309.85(a)(6) and
redesignating § 309.85(a)(7) to (a)(6).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Section 309.130 How will Tribal IV–D
programs be funded and what forms are
required?
In § 309.130(b)(2)(iii), we propose
removing the language ‘‘and for funding
under § 309.65(a) either:’’ at the end of
that provision and replacing it with a
‘‘.’’. Section 309.130(b)(2)(iv) requires
the annual Tribal budget submissions to
include a statement certifying that the
Tribe or Tribal organization has or will
have the non-Federal share of program
expenditures. Section 309.130(b)(2)(v)
permits a request for a waiver of the
non-Federal share in accordance with
paragraph (e) of this section. We
propose removing § 309.130(b)(2)(iv)
and (v) due to the elimination of the
non-Federal share requirement.
Section 309.130(c) describes the
Federal share of program expenditures
for start-up funding and for initial and
ongoing grant funding to administer a
Tribal child support enforcement
program. We propose amending
§ 309.130(c)(2) by removing ‘‘during a 3year period,’’ replacing ‘‘90’’ with
‘‘100’’, and adding ‘‘and thereafter’’
following ‘‘made during that period.’’
We propose amending § 309.130(c)(3) by
removing § 309.130(c)(3)(i),
redesignating paragraph (c)(3)(ii) to
(c)(3), and replacing ‘‘90’’ with ‘‘100’’.
We propose these revisions to indicate
that the Federal share of program
expenditures will be 100 percent due to
the elimination of the non-Federal share
requirement.
Section 309.130(d) describes the
requirements for the non-Federal share
of program expenditures. We propose
removing § 309.130(d) due to the
elimination of the non-Federal share
requirement.
Section 309.130(e) describes the
requirements for permitting a temporary
waiver of part or all of the non-Federal
share of program expenditures. We
propose removing § 309.130(e) due to
the elimination of the non-Federal share
requirement.
Section 309.130(f) describes the
requirements for requesting increases in
the approved Tribal budget and
§ 309.130(f)(3) addresses how budget
increases impact the non-Federal share.
We propose redesignating § 309.130(f) to
309.130(d) and removing § 309.130(f)(3).
Section 309.130(g) describes how to
obtain Federal funds and § 309.130(h)
requires compliance with the uniform
administrative requirements and cost
principles. We propose redesignating
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Apr 20, 2023
Jkt 259001
24533
§ 309.130(g) and (h) to (e) and (f),
respectively.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Section 309.155 What uses of Tribal
IV–D program funds are not allowable?
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 meets the standards of
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
because it creates equity, promotes
predictability, and reduces burdens and
hardships for Tribal child support
enforcement programs. The non-Federal
share requirement limits growth, causes
disruptions, and creates instability.
Eliminating it encourages expansion of
services and enforcement remedies,
removes a financial barrier for
prospective Tribes and Tribal
organizations, prevents closure of
existing Tribal child support
enforcement programs, and provides a
permanent solution to longstanding
problems. This will ensure Tribal
families receive child support services
that reflect and affirm their cultures and
traditions and that promote parental
responsibility and increase disposable
family income and financial stability.
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) at the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) will
review all significant rules. OIRA has
determined that this NPRM is
significant and was accordingly
reviewed by OMB.
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA)
must be prepared for major rules with
economically significant effects ($100
million or more in any 1 year). ACF
does not anticipate that this proposed
rulemaking is likely to have an
economic impact of $100 million or
more in any 1 year, and, therefore, does
not meet the definition of
‘‘economically significant’’ under
Executive Order 12866. Based upon the
increase in program expenditures from
existing Tribal child support
enforcement programs and the modest
growth of new programs due to the
elimination of the non-Federal share, we
anticipate that the costs associated with
this proposed rule will be the following:
FY 2025 $17.2m; FY 2026 $19m; FY
2027 $26.4m; FY 2028 34.3m; and FY
2029 $42.6m.
Section 309.155(c) prohibits a Tribe or
Tribal organization from using Federal
IV–D funds for any expenditures that
have been reimbursed by fees or costs
collected, including any fee collected
from a state. We propose removing
§ 309.155(c) and redesignating
§ 309.155(d), (e), (f), and (g) to (c), (d),
(e), and (f), respectively.
Section 309.170 What statistical and
narrative reporting requirements apply
to Tribal IV–D programs?
Section 309.170(b)(8) requires a Tribe
or Tribal organization to provide annual
information and statistics on the total
amount of fees and costs recovered. We
propose removing § 309.170(b)(8) and
redesignating § 309.170(b)(9) to (b)(8).
Section 310.10 What are the functional
requirements for the Model Tribal IV–D
System?
Section 310.10(c) requires the Model
Tribal IV–D System to record and report
any fees collected, either directly or by
interfacing with state or Tribal financial
management and expenditure
information. We propose removing
§ 310.10(c) and redesignating
§ 310.10(d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) to (c), (d),
(e), (f), and (g), respectively.
Section 310.20 What are the
conditions for funding the installation,
operation, maintenance and
enhancement of Computerized Tribal
IV–D Systems and Office Automation?
Section 310.20(a) describes the
conditions that must be met for Federal
financial participation for Computerized
Tribal IV–D Systems. We propose
replacing ‘‘90’’ with ‘‘100’’.
Paperwork Reduction Act
No new information collection
requirements are imposed by these
regulations.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Secretary certifies that, under 5
U.S.C. 605(b), as enacted by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–
354), this proposed rule will not result
in a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The primary
impact is on Tribal governments. Tribal
governments are not considered small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
24534
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
impact as defined in the executive
order.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) requires
agencies to prepare an assessment of
anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule that may result in an
annual expenditure by state, local, and
Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
by the private sector, of $100 million or
more (adjusted annually for inflation).
That threshold level is currently
approximately $164 million. This
proposed rule does not impose any
mandates on state, local, or Tribal
governments, or the private sector, that
will result in an annual expenditure of
$164 million or more.
List of Subjects
Assessment of Federal Regulations and
Policies on Families
Section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 requires Federal agencies to
determine whether a proposed policy or
regulation may affect family well-being.
If the agency’s determination is
affirmative, then the agency must
prepare an impact assessment
addressing seven criteria specified in
the law. We certify that we have
assessed this proposed rule’s impact on
the well-being of families. The purpose
of the Tribal child support enforcement
program is to strengthen the financial
and social stability of families. This
proposed rule eliminates the burden
and hardships imposed by non-Federal
share requirement for Tribal child
support enforcement programs, which
limits growth, causes disruptions, and
creates instability. Eliminating it
encourages expansion of services and
enforcement remedies, removes a
financial barrier for prospective Tribes
and Tribal organizations, and prevents
closure of existing Tribal child support
enforcement programs. The proposed
rule will have a positive effect on family
well-being. It will ensure Tribal families
receive child support services that
reflect and affirm their cultures and
traditions and that promote parental
responsibility and increase disposable
family income and financial stability.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 prohibits an
agency from publishing any rule that
has federalism implications if the rule
either imposes substantial direct
compliance costs on state and local
governments and is not required by
statute, or the rule preempts state law,
unless the agency meets the
consultation and funding requirements
of section 6 of the Executive Order. This
proposed rule does not have federalism
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Apr 20, 2023
Jkt 259001
45 CFR Part 309
Child support, Grant programs—
social programs, Indians—tribal
government, Reporting and record
keeping requirements.
45 CFR Part 310
Child support, Grant programs—
social programs, Indians.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Programs No. 93.563, Child Support
Enforcement Program.)
Xavier Becerra,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Department of Health and
Human Services proposes to amend 45
CFR parts 309 and 310 as set forth
below:
PART 309—TRIBAL CHILD SUPPORT
ENFORCEMENT (IV–D PROGRAM)
1. The authority citation for part 309
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 655(f) and 1302.
■
■
■
2. Amend § 309.15 by:
a. Revising paragraph (a)(2)(iii); and
b. Removing (a)(2)(iv) and (v).
The revision reads as follows:
§ 309.15 What is a Tribal IV–D program
application?
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) A narrative justification for each
cost category on the form.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 309.45 by revising
paragraph (g) to read as follows:
§ 309.45 When and how may a Tribe or
Tribal organization request reconsideration
of a disapproval action?
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Disapproval of start-up funding
and a request for waiver of the 100-child
rule is not subject to administrative
appeal.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Amend § 309.75 by revising
paragraph (e) introductory text and
removing paragraphs (e)(1) through (4)
to read as follows:
§ 309.75 What administrative and
management procedures must a Tribe or
Tribal organization include in a Tribal IV–D
plan?
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Procedures that prohibit charging
fees and recovering costs.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 309.85
[Amended]
5. Amend § 309.85 by removing
paragraph (a)(6) and redesignating
paragraph (a)(7) as new paragraph (a)(6).
■ 6. Amend § 309.130 by:
■ a. Revising paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and
(c)(2);
■ b. Removing paragraph (c)(3)(i);
■ c. Redesiginating paragraph (c)(3)(ii)
as paragraph (c)(3) and revising newly
designated paragraph (c)(3);
■ d. Removing paragraph (d) and (e);
■ e. Redesignating paragraph (f) as
paragraph (d) and revising newly
designated paragraph (d); and
■ f. Redesignating paragraphs (g) and (h)
as paragraphs (e) and (f).
The revisions read as follows:
■
§ 309.130 How will Tribal IV–D programs
be funded and what forms are required?
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) A narrative justification for each
cost category on the form.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(2) Beginning with the first day of the
first quarter of the funding grant
specified under § 309.135(a)(2), a Tribe
or Tribal organization will receive
Federal grant funds equal to 100 percent
of the total amount of approved and
allowable expenditures made during
that period and thereafter for the
administration of the Tribal child
support enforcement program.
(3) A Tribe or Tribal organization will
receive Federal grant funds equal to 100
percent of pre-approved costs of
installing the Model Tribal IV–D
System.
(d) Increase in approved budget. (1) A
Tribe or Tribal organization may request
an increase in the approved amount of
its current budget by submitting a
revised SF 424A to ACF and explaining
why it needs the additional funds. The
Tribe or Tribal organization should
submit this request at least 60 days
before additional funds are needed, to
allow the Secretary adequate time to
review the estimates and issue a revised
grant award, if appropriate.
(2) If the change in Tribal IV–D budget
estimate results from a change in the
Tribal IV–D plan, the Tribe or Tribal
organization must submit a plan
amendment in accordance with
§ 309.35(e), a revised SF 424, and a
revised SF 424A with its request for
additional funding. The effective date of
a plan amendment may not be earlier
than the first day of the fiscal quarter in
which an approvable plan is submitted
in accordance with § 309.35(f) of this
part. The Secretary must approve the
plan amendment before approving any
additional funding.
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules
§ 309.155
[Amended]
7. Amend § 309.155 by removing
paragraph (c) and redesignating
paragraphs (d) through (g) as paragraphs
(c) through (f);
■
§ 309.170
[Amended]
8. Amend § 309.170 by removing
paragraph (b)(8) and redesignating
paragraph (b)(9) as new paragraph (b)(8)’
■
PART 310—TRIBAL CHILD SUPPORT
ENFORCEMENT (IV–D PROGRAM)
9. The authority citation for part 310
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 655(f) and 1302.
§ 310.10
[Amended]
10. Amend § 310.10 by removing
paragraph (c) and redesignating
paragraphs (d) through (h) as paragraphs
(c) through (g).
■ 11. Amend § 310.20 by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
■
§ 310.20 What are the conditions for
funding the installation, operation,
maintenance and enhancement of
Computerized Tribal IV–D Systems and
Office Automation?
(a) Conditions that must be met for
FFP at the applicable matching rate in
§ 309.130(c) of this chapter for
Computerized Tribal IV–D Systems. The
following conditions must be met to
obtain 100 percent FFP in the costs of
installation of the Model Tribal IV–D
System and FFP at the applicable
matching rate under § 309.130(c) of this
chapter in the costs of operation,
maintenance, and enhancement of a
Computerized Tribal IV–D System:
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2023–07861 Filed 4–20–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184–42–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA–2023–0012]
RIN 2127–AM54
Side Underride Guards
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA);
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPRM).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
AGENCY:
This ANPRM responds to
Section 23011(c) of the November 2021
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(IIJA), commonly referred to as the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Apr 20, 2023
Jkt 259001
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL),
which directs the Secretary to conduct
research on side underride guards to
better understand their overall
effectiveness, and assess the feasibility,
benefits, costs, and other impacts of
installing side underride guards on
trailers and semitrailers. The BIL further
directs the Secretary to report the
findings of the research in a Federal
Register notice to seek public comment.
In addition, this ANPRM also responds
to a petition for rulemaking from Ms.
Marianne Karth and the Truck Safety
Coalition (TSC).
DATES: You should submit your
comments early enough to ensure that
the docket receives them not later than
June 20, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
to the docket number identified in the
heading of this document by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility:
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name and docket
number. Note that all comments
received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided.
Please see the Privacy Act discussion
below. We will consider all comments
received before the close of business on
the comment closing date indicated
above. To the extent possible, we will
also consider comments filed after the
closing date.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov at any time or to
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays. Telephone:
202–366–9826.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5
U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its
decision-making process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including
any personal information the
commenter provides, to
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24535
www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL–
14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.transportation.gov/privacy. In
order to facilitate comment tracking and
response, we encourage commenters to
provide their name, or the name of their
organization; however, submission of
names is completely optional. Whether
or not commenters identify themselves,
all timely comments will be fully
considered.
Confidential Business Information: If
you wish to submit any information
under a claim of confidentiality, you
must submit your request directly to
NHTSA’s Office of the Chief Counsel.
Requests for confidentiality are
governed by 49 CFR part 512. NHTSA
is currently treating electronic
submission as an acceptable method for
submitting confidential business
information to the agency under part
512. If you would like to submit a
request for confidential treatment, you
may email your submission to Dan
Rabinovitz in the Office of the Chief
Counsel at Daniel.Rabinovitz@dot.gov or
you may contact him for a secure file
transfer link. At this time, you should
not send a duplicate hardcopy of your
electronic CBI submissions to DOT
headquarters. If you claim that any of
the information or documents provided
to the agency constitute confidential
business information within the
meaning of 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4), or are
protected from disclosure pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 1905, you must submit
supporting information together with
the materials that are the subject of the
confidentiality request, in accordance
with part 512, to the Office of the Chief
Counsel. Your request must include a
cover letter setting forth the information
specified in our confidential business
information regulation (49 CFR 512.8)
and a certificate, pursuant to § 512.4(b)
and part 512, Appendix A. In addition,
you should submit a copy, from which
you have deleted the claimed
confidential business information, to the
Docket at the address given above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For technical issues: Ms. Lina
Valivullah, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, West Building, Washington,
DC 20590 (telephone) 202–366–8786,
(email) Lina.Valivullah@dot.gov.
For legal issues: Ms. Callie Roach,
Office of the Chief Counsel, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building, Washington, DC 20590,
(telephone) 202–366–2992, (email)
Callie.Roach@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 77 (Friday, April 21, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24526-24535]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07861]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
45 CFR Parts 309 and 310
RIN 0970-AC99
Elimination of the Tribal Non-Federal Share Requirement
AGENCY: Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), Administration for
Children and Families (ACF), Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: OCSE proposes to eliminate the non-Federal share of program
expenditures requirement for Tribal child support enforcement programs
including the 90/10 and 80/20 cost sharing rates. Based upon the
experiences of and consultations with Tribes and Tribal organizations,
we have determined that the non-Federal share requirement limits
growth, causes disruptions, and creates instability.
DATES: Consideration will be given to written comments on this notice
of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) received on or before June 20, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by [docket number and/or
Regulatory Information Number (RIN) number], by one of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Written comments may be submitted to: Office of
Child Support Enforcement, Attention: Director of Policy and Training,
330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number or RIN for this rulemaking. All comments received
will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chad Sawyer, Senior Policy Specialist,
OCSE Division of Policy and Training, at [email protected] or (202)
774-2323. Deaf and hearing impaired individuals may call the Federal
Dual Party Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m.
Eastern Time.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Submission of Comments
Comments should be specific, address issues raised by the proposed
rule, and explain reasons for any objections or
[[Page 24527]]
recommended changes. Additionally, we will be interested in comments
that indicate agreement with the proposal. We will not acknowledge
receipt of the comments we receive. However, we will review and
consider all comments that are germane and received during the comment
period. We will respond to comments in the preamble to the final rule.
Public Consultations
To obtain the broadest public participation possible on the
proposed rule, OCSE conducted a combination public face-to-face and
virtual Tribal Consultation on April 6, 2023. The importance of
consultation with Indian Tribes was affirmed through Presidential
Memoranda in 1994, 2004, 2009, 2021, and 2022 and Executive Order 13175
in 2000.
We published a Tribal Dear Colleague Letter (TDCL-23-02) with the
specific location, date, and time of the consultation, and disseminated
notices to all comprehensive and start-up Tribal child support
enforcement programs. Additionally, OCSE collaborated with the
Administration for Children and Families, Administration for Native
Americans, and National Association of Tribal Child Support Directors
to disseminate the letter to Tribes and Tribal organizations that do
not have a child support enforcement program.
At the consultation, Tribal leaders or their designees in
attendance made oral presentations and/or provided written comments for
the record if they chose. After the publication of the proposed rule in
the Fall 2022 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions,
OCSE received supportive written comments from States and Tribal child
support enforcement programs.
We encouraged persons who made oral presentations at the
consultation to also submit written comments in support of their
presentations. Testimonies were recorded and will be included in the
public record of comments on the proposed rule.
Prior Consultations
45 CFR 309.130(d) requires a Tribe or Tribal organization \1\ to
provide a non-Federal share of program expenditures in the amount of 10
percent during the first 3 years of operation and 20 percent during
subsequent years. Since the inception of the Tribal Child Support
Enforcement Program, Tribes and Tribal organizations have submitted
oral and written feedback, testimony, and blanket waiver requests
regarding the non-Federal share requirement and cost sharing rates. The
non-Federal share requirement and rates have been longstanding issues
discussed at Tribal Consultations and OCSE listening sessions with
Tribal child support directors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 45 CFR 309.05 for the definition of Tribe and Tribal
organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In August 2011, one Tribe submitted testimony at the ACF Tribal
Consultation regarding the non-Federal share requirement. The Tribe
expressed that the cost sharing requirement was unreasonable since they
had no land base, virtually no resources to provide any financial
profit, and no taxable income to use for the non-Federal share. In the
March 2012 ACF Tribal Consultation, another Tribe provided comments
that they lacked a land base to meet the non-Federal share requirement.
In April 2019, three Tribes and the National Association of Tribal
Child Support Directors submitted testimony at the HHS Tribal Budget
Consultation and requested consultation on the non-Federal share
requirement. In September 2019, the non-Federal share requirement was
on the 2019 ACF Tribal Consultation agenda. During the 2019 ACF Tribal
Consultation, 20 Tribes provided testimony discussing the challenges
they encounter in providing 20 percent of the approved and allowable
program expenditures every fiscal year (FY). They described how the
requirement limits growth, causes disruptions, and creates instability
in their child support enforcement programs. For example, they
mentioned competing with other Tribal departments for limited resources
to operate their programs and having to make difficult budget and
service reductions, despite the complex and growing needs of their
communities. The 2019 ACF consultation also included Tribal written
testimony requesting the repeal of the non-Federal share requirement.
During the 2020 ACF Tribal Consultation, 2021 HHS Regional
Consultation, and 2021 HHS Tribal Budget Consultation, Tribes continued
to discuss their problems with meeting the non-Federal share, reiterate
their request for an expedited resolution, and recommend the
elimination of the non-Federal share requirement.
In addition to Tribal Consultations, OCSE conducted many virtual
and in-person listening sessions with Tribal child support enforcement
programs, held separately or in conjunction with Tribal child support
enforcement conferences or association meetings. At these sessions,
Tribes and Tribal organizations described the difficulties of providing
the non-Federal share through cash or in-kind contributions during the
first 3 years and thereafter. The issue of meeting the non-Federal
share has also been raised multiple times at the ACF Tribal Advisory
Committee meetings. Tribal leaders have asked for the elimination of
the non-Federal share requirement during these meetings.
OCSE received several requests for blanket waivers of the non-
Federal share of program expenditures that were beyond the waiver
authority under 45 CFR 309.130(e). In 2016, 10 Tribes submitted a
request for a blanket waiver based on the Tribal waiver provision in
the HHS Tribal Consultation Policy. Also, in 2016, the National
Association of Tribal Child Support Directors and the National Tribal
Child Support Association submitted separate but similar letters to
OCSE requesting a blanket waiver for the same reasons discussed in the
Tribal requests. The 12 blanket waiver requests indicated that the non-
Federal share requirement was disruptive and posed hardships. The
requests also indicated that the non-Federal share requirement did not
adequately reflect consultation, circumstances unique to Tribal
communities, or authorizing statute that permits funding for Tribal
child support enforcement programs. Specifically, they argued that
section 455(f) of the Social Security Act (the Act) does not impose a
match requirement and, therefore, OCSE should not impose one through
regulation. Most recently, in FY 2022, a Tribe requested a blanket
waiver for their child support program and for other programs based on
the waiver flexibilities contained in Executive Order 13132.
OCSE denied all the blanket waiver requests of the non-Federal
share of program expenditures in accordance with 45 CFR 309.130(e).
Section 309.130(e) describes the circumstances and criteria for
requesting a temporary waiver of the non-Federal share requirement.
This regulation is binding on OCSE and does not permit blanket waivers.
The Tribal waiver provisions under the HHS Tribal Consultation Policy
and Executive Order 13132 are limited ``to the extent practicable and
permitted by law.'' Given this limitation, OCSE had no authority to
grant blanket waivers.
Statutory Authority
This NPRM is published in accordance with section 455(f) of the
Social Security Act (the Act) (42 U.S.C. 655(f)). Section 455(f) of the
Act requires the Secretary to issue regulations governing the grants to
Tribes and Tribal organizations operating child support enforcement
programs.
[[Page 24528]]
This proposed rule is also published under the authority granted to
the Secretary of Health and Human Services by section 1102 of the Act
(42 U.S.C. 1302). Section 1102 of the Act authorizes the Secretary to
publish regulations, not inconsistent with the Act, as may be necessary
for the efficient administration of the functions with which the
Secretary is responsible under the Act.
Background
The Child Support Enforcement Program was established in 1975 under
Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. It functions in all states and
several Tribes and territories. State and Tribal child support
enforcement programs locate noncustodial parents, establish paternity,
establish and enforce support orders, modify orders when appropriate,
collect and distribute child support payments, and refer parents to
other services. They help to ensure that noncustodial parents provide
financial support for their children. Child support payments play an
important role in reducing child poverty, lifting nearly three-quarters
of a million families out of poverty in 2017.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Fact
Sheet: Approaches for engaging fathers in child support programs
(October 2021), available at https://aspe.hhs.gov/reports/father-engagement-child-support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prior to the enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-193),
title IV-D of the Act did not include direct funding for Tribes and
Tribal organizations seeking to operate their own child support
enforcement programs. Indirect Federal funding was available for a
Tribe or Tribal organization that entered into cooperative agreements
with a state and the state delegated functions of their child support
program to the Tribe or Tribal organization. PRWORA amended section
455(f) of the Act and authorized the Secretary to provide direct
funding to Tribes and Tribal organizations to operate child support
enforcement programs under title IV-D and to promulgate implementing
regulations. Implementing regulations are contained in 45 CFR parts 309
and 310.
On August 21, 2000, OCSE published the NPRM for the Tribal Child
Support Enforcement Program (65 FR 50800). Prior to publishing the
NPRM, OCSE conducted numerous consultations, including a series of six
Nation-to-Nation consultations with Tribes, Tribal organizations, and
other interested parties across the country (65 FR 50804). OCSE also
set up a toll free ``800'' number to allow for additional comments and
input by Tribes and solicited further input from previous consultation
participants to help OCSE understand the issues raised during the
consultation process.
The NPRM proposed requirements that Tribes and Tribal organizations
must meet to be eligible for title IV-D funding and provided guidance
on how they could apply for and, upon approval, receive direct funding
for the operation of their child support program (65 FR 50800). Based
upon Tribal recommendations during the consultations, OCSE used the
state child support enforcement program as a model but eased the
technical requirements applicable to the states in recognition of the
unique circumstances of Tribes and Tribal organizations (65 FR 50804).
As such, the NPRM included a substantially lower cost sharing rate than
is required of the states under title IV-D (65 FR 50823).
The NPRM stated that OCSE considered several different funding
approaches that controlled costs, including performance-based funding,
funding based on cost per child to operate the program, capping certain
costs, and state-cost based funding (65 FR 50823). OCSE engaged in
extensive deliberations over the issue of funding for Tribal child
support enforcement programs. After careful consideration of the
advantages and disadvantages of each cost control funding approach,
ultimately, the Secretary proposed open-ended funding with a Tribal
match (65 FR 50823). The NPRM proposed that Tribes and Tribal
organizations provide a 10 percent match during the start-up period and
first 3 years of operation, with the match increasing to 20 percent
thereafter (65 FR 50823). The NPRM also included a waiver provision
allowing the Secretary to waive the non-Federal share for Tribes and
Tribal organizations that lacked sufficient resources and met certain
specific criteria (65 FR 50823). Additionally, the NPRM indicated that
``if the Secretary determines based on experience and consultation with
Tribes that the 80/20 match rate is disruptive to the program and
imposes hardship to Tribes, the regulations will be revised
accordingly'' (65 FR 50823).
The Tribal Child Support Enforcement Program final rule was
promulgated on March 30, 2004 (hereinafter final rule) and included a
revised cost sharing provision (69 FR 16638). In the final rule, OCSE
indicated that it received numerous comments from Tribes objecting to
the cost sharing requirement. In response, OCSE again expressed concern
regarding the control of costs in the Tribal child support enforcement
program, stating that ``unlike other Tribal grant programs, the funding
for Tribal IV-D programs are not sum certain grants,'' meaning a
specified and set amount of funds (69 FR 16667). OCSE further stated
that the cost sharing requirement was maintained after determining
``that a non-Federal share in expenditures is necessary, based on the
principle that better programs and better management result when local
resources are invested'' (69 FR 16667). However, in response to
comments, the match requirement was changed to allow 100 percent
funding during the start-up period, not to exceed 2 years, and, capped
at $500,000 per 45 CFR 309.130(c)(1). OCSE noted that the non-Federal
match for start-up costs was eliminated in recognition that ``Tribes
just beginning title IV-D child support enforcement may have very
limited funds for this activity'' (69 FR 16646).
In accordance with 45 CFR 309.10(a) and (b), to apply for and
receive Federal funding to operate a Tribal child support enforcement
program, a Tribe or Tribal organization must have at least 100 children
under the age of majority as defined by Tribal law or code, in the
population subject to the jurisdiction of the Tribal court or
administrative agency. The age of majority is the age at which a person
is considered an adult, which is typically 18 years old. The
requirement to have at least 100 children under the age of 18 years old
helps to ensure that Tribes and Tribal organizations will have enough
potential child support cases to be cost effective. However, 45 CFR
309.10(c) permits a waiver of this requirement when a Tribe or Tribal
organizations submits a request with the required information
demonstrating that it can provide the services required under 45 CFR
part 309 in a cost-effective manner even though the population subject
to Tribal jurisdiction includes fewer than 100 children.
The Tribal child support enforcement program regulation permits
Federal funding in two ways. When Tribes or Tribal organizations do not
meet the regulatory requirements to operate a child support enforcement
program, they may apply for start-up funding in accordance with 45 CFR
309.16. Start-up funding enables Tribes and Tribal organizations with
the basic governmental and administrative capabilities to work towards
meeting the requirements to operate a child support enforcement program
in accordance with the regulation. The start-up application must
include a program development plan, detailing the specific steps a
Tribe or Tribal organization will
[[Page 24529]]
take to become compliant with the requirements of 45 CFR 309.65(a), and
the timeframe associated with each step. Federal funding for start-up
costs is limited to $500,000, which must be used within two years after
the first day of the quarter after the start-up application was
approved, in accordance with 45 CFR 309.16(c).
When Tribes or Tribal organizations determine that they meet the
regulatory requirements to operate a child support enforcement program,
they may apply for comprehensive funding in accordance with 45 CFR
309.15. The application must include a Tribal IV-D plan that
demonstrates compliance with the 14 required elements described in 45
CFR 309.65(a). For example, a Tribe must have procedures to accept all
applications, safeguard personal and confidential information, and
locate noncustodial parents and their assets. During the first 3 years
of operating a child support program, Tribes or Tribal organizations
receive Federal grant funds equal to 90 percent of the total amount of
approved and allowable expenditures, in accordance with 45 CFR
309.130(c)(2). During the fourth year and subsequent years, Tribes or
Tribal organizations receive Federal grant funds equal to 80 percent of
the total amount of approved and allowable expenditures, in accordance
with 45 CFR 309.130(c)(3). Tribes and Tribal organizations must provide
the non-Federal share of program expenditures, either 10 percent or 20
percent, with cash or in-kind contributions pursuant to 45 CFR
309.130(d).
45 CFR 309.130(e) permits, under certain circumstances, a temporary
waiver of part or all of the non-Federal share of program expenditures.
This provision includes two types of temporary waiver requests that a
Tribe or Tribal organization may submit for consideration:
``anticipated temporary waiver request'' and ``emergency waiver
request.'' Both waiver requests must be submitted in accordance with
the procedures specified in 45 CFR 309.130(e)(2) through (4). These
procedures require the submission of extensive information and
documentation to demonstrate the temporary lack of resources and
justify the waiver request.
Under 45 CFR 309.130(e)(1)(i), when Tribes or Tribal organizations
anticipate that they will be temporarily unable to contribute part or
all of the required non-Federal share of program funding, they must
submit an anticipated temporary waiver request. The anticipated waiver,
due no later than 60 days before the start of the funding period, is
more restrictive because untimely or incomplete requests will not be
considered, in accordance with 45 CFR 309.130(e)(1)(i). Many Tribal
child support enforcement programs have been denied anticipated waivers
because of untimely or incomplete requests. An untimely anticipated
waiver request means a Tribe submitted the request after the deadline
of August 1 pursuant to 45 CFR 309.130(e)(1)(i). An incomplete
anticipated waiver request means a Tribe did not include all the
information required by 45 CFR 309.130(e)(2) through (4), such as
portions of the Tribal budget sufficient to demonstrate the extent of
the funding shortfall and uncommitted funds.
Under 45 CFR 309.130(e)(1)(ii), after the start of the funding
period, if an emergency situation occurs, such as a hurricane or flood,
that warrants a waiver of the non-Federal share of program
expenditures, Tribes or Tribal organizations may submit an emergency
waiver request. Over the years, the emergency waiver has been requested
more frequently than the anticipated waiver for a number of reasons,
most recently due to natural disasters and public health emergencies.
Justification
The purpose of this proposed rule is to eliminate the non-Federal
share requirement for Tribal child support enforcement programs because
it limits growth, causes disruptions, and creates instability. The
proposed rule reflects OCSE's comment in the 2000 NPRM that the
matching requirement would be revised accordingly if the Secretary
determines, based on experience gained through operations of Tribal
child support enforcement programs and consultation with Tribes, that
the 80/20 match rate is disruptive to the program and imposes hardship
to Tribes (65 FR 50823). The proposed rule also responds to feedback
and recommendations submitted during Tribal Consultations and OCSE
listening sessions about the hardship of meeting the non-Federal share
requirement.
Tribal child support enforcement programs are beneficial for Tribal
Nations, particularly given their ability to provide services to
families in a manner that is consistent with tribal values and
cultures. For example, Tribes or Tribal organizations exercise their
sovereignty over their members, ensure parental responsibility,
increase family disposable income, incorporate Tribal culture and
traditions, offer unique services like non-cash support, and reduce the
need for other supportive services such as Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF). In FY 2021, Tribal child support enforcement
programs collected $53 million in child support payments and 97 percent
went to families.\3\ Native American children in Tribal areas with
child support enforcement programs are in great need of child support,
especially since 53 percent of Native American children in these areas
lived in single-parent families.\4\ According to data from the 2015
American Community Survey, nearly one-third of Native Americans living
in Tribal areas with a child support program lived below the poverty
line in 2015 (that year, the poverty line for a family of three was
$20,090).\5\ This poverty rate was more than twice the poverty rate for
Americans in general (15 percent). Particularly stark is the poverty
rate among Native American children living in these areas, which was 40
percent.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See OCSE 2021 Tribal Infographic at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ocse/tribal_infographic_2021.pdf.
\4\ See OCSE Exploring Tribal Demographic Data: Part Two at
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/css/ocsedatablog/2023/01/exploring-tribal-demographic-data-part-two.
\5\ See OCSE Exploring Tribal Demographic Data: Part One at
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/css/ocsedatablog/2022/11/exploring-tribal-demographic-data-part-one.
\6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tribal child support enforcement programs are also beneficial for
states, specifically in enforcing state child support orders and
collecting child support payments in intergovernmental cases. 45 CFR
309.120(a) requires a Tribal child support enforcement program to
extend the full range of services to respond to all requests from, and
cooperate with, state and other Tribal child support enforcement
programs. This includes recognizing and enforcing child support orders
issued by a state or another Tribe or Tribal organization, in
accordance with 45 CFR 309.120(b). For example, when a Tribal child
support enforcement program receives a request for assistance from a
state, they register the state child support order in Tribal court and
enforce it. Then the Tribe collects the child support payment from the
noncustodial parent and sends it to the state in accordance with 45 CFR
309.115(d). Without this assistance from Tribal child support
enforcement programs, states are, for the most part, unable to collect
child support payments because they lack jurisdiction to enforce their
child support orders in Tribal Nations. In FY 2021, Tribal child
support enforcement programs collected and sent $11 million in child
support
[[Page 24530]]
payments to states, other Tribes, and countries.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See OCSE 2021 Tribal Infographic at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ocse/tribal_infographic_2021.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet, to date, few Tribes and Tribal organizations operate child
support enforcement programs, although funding was authorized 18 years
ago. Out of the 574 federally recognized Tribes, only 60 operate Tribal
child support enforcement programs despite the flexible eligibility
requirements to receive program funding.\8\ A majority of the Tribal
child support enforcement programs were established between 2008 and
2014. In the past 5 years, only one Tribal child support enforcement
program was established. Currently, there is only one Tribe in the
start-up phase, completing the necessary work to meet the regulatory
requirements to operate a Tribal child support enforcement program.
OCSE has heard that the non-Federal share requirement is a major
barrier preventing Tribes and Tribal organizations from applying for
program funding, despite the need for Tribal child support enforcement
services. For example, during the 2019 ACF Tribal Consultation, one
Tribe testified that they had been considering adding a child support
program; however, hearing all the testimony with concerns about the
non-Federal share requirement dissuaded them from starting one. This
testimony mirrors comments OCSE staff have heard from prospective
Tribes during presentations or conversations about the Tribal child
support enforcement program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See U.S. Department of Interior Indian Affairs Tribal Leader
Directory at https://www.bia.gov/service/tribal-leaders-directory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many Tribes and Tribal organizations face systemic, historical, and
ongoing issues that impact their ability to meet the non-Federal
share.\9\ For example, some Tribes have high rates of unemployment and
families living below the poverty level, have limited and vulnerable
Tribal enterprises that generate revenue, are in rural underdeveloped
communities, are exposed to greater environmental threats, and lack
robust economies. In fact, 45 CFR 309.130(e)(4) includes some of these
same issues that impact a Tribe's ability to meet the non-Federal share
and support a request to waive this requirement. Additionally, most
Tribal child support directors have indicated that they often compete
with other Tribal departments and programs to obtain limited Tribal
government funding. Economic downturns and disasters in Tribal Nations
reduce these limited government funds even further and force Tribal
officials to make tough decisions about how to allocate and use funds
and resources. These issues, at least in part, make the non-Federal
match too burdensome.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Broken Promises:
Continuing Federal Funding Shortfall for Native Americans (December
2018), available at https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/12-20-Broken-Promises.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal laws regarding real property exacerbate the burden by
restricting how Tribes and Tribal organizations can claim Tribally
owned property as part of their non-Federal share of program
expenditures. Many Tribal child support enforcement programs are housed
in Tribally owned property. When an entity owns a building and/or
office space and it is claimed or contributed to the award, 45 CFR
75.436 requires that the building and/or office space must be valued
using depreciation, whether claimed as an administrative cost or for
cost sharing purposes. Depreciation must be computed in accordance with
45 CFR 75.436(d). This means that the Tribal property cannot be
assessed at the fair market value as if the Tribal child support
enforcement program is renting or leasing it. As such, Tribal child
support enforcement programs claim depreciation, maintenance, and
insurance (OCSE-IM-20-05). For these Tribes, using depreciated value
may be substantially less than using fair market value for a tribally
owned property or office space.
Even if a Tribe or Tribal organization operates a child support
enforcement program, the non-Federal match requires the program be
limited in other ways, which negatively impacts vulnerable Tribal
families and children. Meeting the non-Federal share disproportionately
drives programmatic and fiscal decisions. For example, most Tribal
child support enforcement programs use incurred cost from Tribal court
personnel who process child support cases as part of their contribution
toward the non-Federal share. The number of such cases fluctuates and
relies on parents attending court hearings, which may pose a burden on
parents with low incomes, transportation challenges, or disabilities.
Most Tribal child support directors have indicated that they had to
defer filling vacancies, performing automation or system upgrades, and
paying for required security assessments to access the Federal Parent
Locator Service, which helps in locating noncustodial parents and their
assets. Some Tribal child support directors have also indicated that
they have delayed acquiring any system automation due to the cost and
subsequently their proportionate non-Federal share and are, instead,
using Microsoft tools such as Word and Excel to manage their caseloads.
As a result, many Tribal child support enforcement programs struggle to
operate with resource deficits.
These resource deficits prevent some Tribal programs from expanding
beyond the delivery of core child support services, such as
establishing paternity and locating noncustodial parents and their
assets. Many cannot provide intensive case management for low-income
noncustodial parents due to staffing shortages. Intensive case
management is used to identify barriers to paying child support, make
appropriate referrals, monitor compliance and outcomes, and collaborate
with other social service programs to ensure noncustodial parents
receive services that help them become responsible parents and pay
consistent and reliable child support. Many also lack the resources to
pursue discretionary, competitive grant opportunities awarded under
section 1115 of the Act, which promote innovation and research. Using
funds from section 1115(a) of the Act, OCSE offers grant opportunities
periodically, based on available funding each year, to state and Tribal
child support enforcement programs, or their state umbrella agencies.
Section 1115 demonstration grants must be used for research and to
improve the child support enforcement program. Each funding opportunity
is unique, and applications must respond to the outlined project goals
and requirements in the announcement.
During Tribal Consultations and listening sessions, many Tribal
child support enforcement programs have expressed their fears about
closing their child support program because they cannot provide the
required non-Federal share. When a Tribe cannot afford the non-Federal
share and does not obtain a waiver of this requirement, they do not
receive any Federal funds to operate their child support enforcement
program. Consequently, they are forced to close their program and may
refer their Tribal parents to another Tribe for child support services.
In FY 2017, a Tribe closed their child support enforcement program
because they were unable to meet the non-Federal share of program
expenditures. In the Tribe's letter regarding the closure of their
program, they shared that the match contribution for a Tribal child
support enforcement program is a barrier for any Tribe to be
successful. In the FYs 2020, 2021, and 2022 waiver requests, most
Tribes and Tribal organizations indicated they were in jeopardy of
[[Page 24531]]
shutting down without a waiver of part or all of the required non-
Federal share. They indicated that they were unclear when Tribal
enterprises, which were already vulnerable before the economic
downturn, would recover and generate enough revenue to help them meet
the non-Federal share. Additionally, although 45 CFR 309.75(e) permits
Tribal child support enforcement programs to charge an application fee
or recover costs, most Tribes and Tribal organizations do not charge
fees or recover costs since many Tribal families are low income.
Therefore, they do not generate program income that could be used for
the non-Federal share.
Temporary waivers of the non-Federal share of program expenditures
do not provide a sufficient or permanent solution. Although 45 CFR
309.130(e)(4) identifies issues faced by most Tribes and Tribal
organizations, such as little or no economic development, it also
requires documentary evidence to support statements about how these
issues impact meeting the non-Federal share. Meeting these requirements
in annual applications for a waiver due to intractable economic reasons
or for unforeseen emergencies imposes a significant administrative and
paperwork burden for Tribal child support enforcement programs. It
requires Tribes and Tribal organizations to redirect time and resources
away from administering their programs and meeting the pressing needs
of their communities when they are often already under resourced. Over
the years, many Tribal child support enforcement programs have
indicated that they have not applied for a waiver due to the extensive
submission procedures, which act as barriers to accessing relief. In
response, Tribes submitted blanket waiver requests, as indicated
previously, to make these waivers of the non-Federal share more
accessible and effective over multiple fiscal years.
Until recently, OCSE received and approved very few waiver
requests. For example, between FYs 2016 and 2019, OCSE granted 10
waivers of the non-Federal share. Beginning in 2020 due to the declared
national public health emergency for the COVID-19 pandemic, OCSE
provided flexibilities for emergency waiver submissions, which
encouraged more Tribes and Tribal organizations to apply. Under the
pandemic flexibilities, OCSE understood that Tribal child support
enforcement programs were unable to provide a portion of their Tribal
budget or make attempts to secure the necessary funds and in-kind
contributions from other sources in accordance with 45 CFR
309.130(e)(2)(iii) and (v). As a result, OCSE approved waivers in
larger numbers: 31 in FY 2020, 27 in FY 2021, and 12 in FY 2022. The
emergency waiver flexibilities will end when the COVID-19 Public Health
Emergency ends on May 11, 2023 (see OCSE-DCL-23-04). But the need for
these waivers was not just due to the pandemic. Instead, the pandemic
exacerbated and highlighted longstanding difficulties with meeting the
non-Federal share. Tribes and Tribal organizations may be unable to
overcome the procedural barriers to apply for and receive a waiver and
may have to terminate their child support enforcement program if they
are unable to provide the non-Federal share or receive a waiver.
Eliminating the non-Federal share will provide a permanent solution to
the administrative burdens, access barriers, and limited effect of the
temporary waivers.
Waiver requests also impose an administrative burden on OCSE,
without providing a long-term solution. By eliminating the non-Federal
share requirement, OCSE can better use its expertise, resources, and
efforts to build collaborative, government-to-government relationships
with Tribes and Tribal organizations to foster innovation, engage in
human centered design projects, and focus on topics that advance
program priorities and improve outcomes for recipients of Tribal child
support enforcement services.
Although OCSE previously determined during drafting of the Tribal
Child Support Enforcement Program regulations that a non-Federal match
was important to ensure ``better programs and better management'' (69
FR 16667), it has now reconsidered that conclusion after seeing the
Tribal child support enforcement program in practice during the past
two decades. Based on its experience, OCSE now concludes that its
oversight tools are sufficient, without the non-Federal share match, to
monitor use of funds for IV-D expenditures and consider cost
containment. The Tribes show in their budget submissions and
communications with OCSE that they are engaged in operating successful
programs and using Federal funds properly, efficiently, and
effectively, in accordance with 45 CFR 309.60(b). The primary method
for evaluating and ensuring allowable and appropriate costs is through
the budget submission, review, and approval process. 45 CFR 309.15(c)
requires Tribal child support enforcement programs to submit a budget
to receive Title IV-D funding to administer their child support
enforcement programs. Budgets must include the detailed information
specified in 45 CFR 309.130(b) and OCSE guidance, such as quarterly
estimate of expenditures, narrative justification for each cost
category, and copies of contracts (see Tribal Child Support Budget
Toolbox and OCSE PIQT-21-01).\10\ OCSE and OGM review Tribal budget
submissions for compliance with 45 CFR parts 309, 310, 75, and other
applicable Federal laws. During the review of Tribal budgets, OCSE and
OGM examine the estimates of program expenditures, determine whether
the budget narratives and documentation justify costs, and approve
allowable costs charged to the Title IV-D grant before awarding funds.
OCSE reviews the entire budget in detail to ensure the costs are
reasonable and necessary given the caseload size and other demographic
and geographic factors. OCSE compares contract costs to industry
standards and similar contracts from other child support enforcement
programs. For questionable costs, OCSE works with the Tribe to obtain
additional information or revise or remove those costs when warranted.
For example, OCSE determined that a Tribe's contract costs for
information technology development were higher than the industry
standard and worked with the Tribe to secure a reduction in the costs
before approving the contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See the optional Tribal Budget and Justification Narrative
Template at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ocse/Tribal_budget_justification_narrative_template.docx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
45 CFR 309.145 describes the allowable costs for Tribal child
support enforcement programs and requires such costs to be reasonable,
necessary, and allocable to the program. 45 CFR 309.130(h) mandates
compliance with 45 CFR part 75, which describes the uniform
administrative requirements and cost principles. 45 CFR 75.403 through
75.405 provide specific requirements for determining whether costs are
allowable, reasonable, and allocable. Since OCSE must approve a Tribe's
budget before OGM issues a notice of grant award, OCSE has direct
oversight over Tribal expenditures before Tribal child support
enforcement programs drawdown and use Title IV-D funds at the start of
the fiscal year. After OCSE approves a Tribe's budget, a Tribe may
request additional funds by submitting the information specified in 45
CFR 309.130(f)(1). If the increase in funds impacts the Tribal IV-D
plan, the Tribe must also submit a plan amendment in accordance with 45
CFR 309.130(f)(2). A Tribe must provide the required information and
documentation and the costs must
[[Page 24532]]
comply with the Federal regulations before OCSE approves the request
for an increase in funds. This ensures that increases in approved
Tribal budgets are reasonable, necessary, allowable, and appropriate.
Additionally, OCSE uses a variety of technical assistance methods
to assess needs and provide support to Tribes on the uniform grant
requirements and cost principles. When reviewing Tribal budgets, OCSE
analyzes issues and trends in expenditures and uses that information to
deliver training and to ensure funds are used efficiently and
effectively for all parties. OCSE also provides annual and tailored
training and technical assistance about Tribal budget and grant
requirements during site visits, regional meetings, national webinars,
and conferences. Site visits help OCSE to obtain and understand
information about how Tribes and Tribal organizations use Title IV-D
funds to operate and administer their Tribal child support enforcement
programs. OCSE regional office staff work closely with Tribal child
support staff to answer questions, share best practices, review budgets
and grant reports, and monitor the administration and performance of
Tribal child support enforcement programs.
As evidenced by years of Federal review, Tribes and Tribal
organizations have demonstrated the importance of spending Federal
grant funds prudently, efficiently, and effectively. Tribes are
invested in helping noncustodial and custodial parents support their
children financially and emotionally. Accordingly, OCSE is now of the
view that Tribes and Tribal organizations will continue to provide
Tribal resources, such as Tribally owned building or office space, to
ensure the success of their Tribal child support enforcement programs--
even in the absence of a mandatory non-Federal match. The Tribal child
support enforcement program regulations provide OCSE with sufficient
authority to control costs and monitor compliance without the non-
Federal share requirement. As a result, the overall Tribal child
support enforcement program expenditures of existing Tribes will not
rise substantially beyond normal cost increases due to factors like
inflation, filling vacancies, or upgrading equipment and systems. The
impact to the Federal budget will be modest.
Even with the elimination of the non-Federal share, OCSE does not
expect that every federally recognized Tribe or Tribal organization
will request funding to operate a Tribal child support enforcement
program, meaning that OCSE expects only a modest and gradual increase
in program expenditures. Prospective Tribes and Tribal organizations
may not have the needed administrative capacity or infrastructure to
operate a child support enforcement program. They may not have 100
children under the age of majority. Although they may request a waiver
of this requirement (45 CFR 309.10(c)), the waiver must demonstrate
that their prospective Tribal child support enforcement program will be
cost effective (45 CFR 309.10(c)(1)(iii)). Additionally, prospective
Tribes and Tribal organizations may not want to comply with the
extensive requirements and procedures required to receive funding (45
CFR 309.65). A Tribal court can hear child support cases without the
Tribe administering a child support enforcement program. Administering
a Tribal child support enforcement program and working with parents on
such a vulnerable and sensitive subject is complex and demanding.
Instead of operating their own Tribal child support enforcement
program, they may jointly operate a program or may receive child
support services from an existing Tribal child support enforcement
program. In sum, and for the reasons discussed above, OSCE projects the
number of new Tribal child support enforcement programs to grow
modestly before plateauing, thus preventing a dramatic increase in
Federal costs. And any such increase in Federal costs is offset by the
benefits that this proposed rule would provide in helping to prevent
existing Tribal child support enforcement programs from closing and
provide a permanent solution to the problems related to the non-Federal
share requirement. However, even if eliminating the non-Federal share
results in many more Tribes and Tribal organizations applying for and
receiving approval to operate a child support enforcement program,
Tribal participation in this program is, in fact, what Congress
intended when it authorized funding under PRWORA. This will ensure the
opportunity for Tribal families to receive child support enforcement
services that reflect and affirm their Tribal cultures and traditions,
create financial stability, and family economic well-being to help lift
Tribal families out of poverty.
Section-By-Section Discussion of the Provisions of This Proposed Rule
This NPRM proposes to eliminate the non-Federal share for Tribal
child support enforcement programs. The following is a discussion of
the regulatory provisions included in this NPRM.
Section 309.15 What is a Tribal IV-D program application?
In Sec. 309.15(a)(2)(iii), we propose removing the language ``;
and either:'' at the end of that provision and inserting a ``.'' in
their place. Section 309.15(a)(2)(iv) requires the initial application
for funding to include a statement that the Tribe or Tribal
organization has or will have the non-Federal share of program
expenditures available. Section 309.15(a)(2)(v) permits a request for a
waiver of the non-Federal share in accordance with Sec. 309.130(e). We
propose removing Sec. 309.15(a)(2)(iv) and (v) due to the elimination
of the non-Federal share.
Section 309.45 When and how may a Tribe or Tribal organization request
reconsideration of a disapproval action?
Section 309.45(g) indicates that disapproval of start-up funding, a
request for waiver of the 100-child rule, and a request for waiver of
the non-Federal Tribal share is not subject to administrative appeal.
We propose amending Sec. 309.45(g) by removing ``, and a request for
waiver of the non-Federal Tribal share.'' Revised paragraph (g) will
read as follows: ``Disapproval of start-up funding and a request for
waiver of the 100-child rule is not subject to administrative appeal.''
Section 309.75 What administrative and management procedures must a
Tribe or Tribal organization include in a Tribal IV-D plan?
Section 309.75(e) describes the requirements for a Tribe and Tribal
organization that intends to charge an application fee or recover costs
in excess of the fee. Collected fees and recovered costs are considered
program income and deducted from total allowable costs in accordance
with 45 CFR 309.75(e)(4) and 45 CFR 75.307(e)(1). Due to the proposed
elimination of the non-Federal share requirement, we propose revising
Sec. 309.75(e) to require Tribal child support enforcement programs to
have procedures that prohibit charging fees and recovering costs and to
remove paragraphs (e)(1) through (4).
Section 309.85 What records must a Tribe or Tribal organization agree
to maintain in a Tribal IV-D plan?
Section 309.85(a)(6) requires a Tribe or Tribal organization to
maintain records on any fees charged and collected, if applicable. As
previously stated, collected fees and recovered costs are considered
program income and deducted from total allowable costs in accordance
with 45 CFR 309.75(e)(4) and 45 CFR 75.307(e)(1). Due to the
[[Page 24533]]
proposed elimination of the non-Federal share requirement, we propose
removing Sec. 309.85(a)(6) and redesignating Sec. 309.85(a)(7) to
(a)(6).
Section 309.130 How will Tribal IV-D programs be funded and what forms
are required?
In Sec. 309.130(b)(2)(iii), we propose removing the language ``and
for funding under Sec. 309.65(a) either:'' at the end of that
provision and replacing it with a ``.''. Section 309.130(b)(2)(iv)
requires the annual Tribal budget submissions to include a statement
certifying that the Tribe or Tribal organization has or will have the
non-Federal share of program expenditures. Section 309.130(b)(2)(v)
permits a request for a waiver of the non-Federal share in accordance
with paragraph (e) of this section. We propose removing Sec.
309.130(b)(2)(iv) and (v) due to the elimination of the non-Federal
share requirement.
Section 309.130(c) describes the Federal share of program
expenditures for start-up funding and for initial and ongoing grant
funding to administer a Tribal child support enforcement program. We
propose amending Sec. 309.130(c)(2) by removing ``during a 3-year
period,'' replacing ``90'' with ``100'', and adding ``and thereafter''
following ``made during that period.'' We propose amending Sec.
309.130(c)(3) by removing Sec. 309.130(c)(3)(i), redesignating
paragraph (c)(3)(ii) to (c)(3), and replacing ``90'' with ``100''. We
propose these revisions to indicate that the Federal share of program
expenditures will be 100 percent due to the elimination of the non-
Federal share requirement.
Section 309.130(d) describes the requirements for the non-Federal
share of program expenditures. We propose removing Sec. 309.130(d) due
to the elimination of the non-Federal share requirement.
Section 309.130(e) describes the requirements for permitting a
temporary waiver of part or all of the non-Federal share of program
expenditures. We propose removing Sec. 309.130(e) due to the
elimination of the non-Federal share requirement.
Section 309.130(f) describes the requirements for requesting
increases in the approved Tribal budget and Sec. 309.130(f)(3)
addresses how budget increases impact the non-Federal share. We propose
redesignating Sec. 309.130(f) to 309.130(d) and removing Sec.
309.130(f)(3).
Section 309.130(g) describes how to obtain Federal funds and Sec.
309.130(h) requires compliance with the uniform administrative
requirements and cost principles. We propose redesignating Sec.
309.130(g) and (h) to (e) and (f), respectively.
Section 309.155 What uses of Tribal IV-D program funds are not
allowable?
Section 309.155(c) prohibits a Tribe or Tribal organization from
using Federal IV-D funds for any expenditures that have been reimbursed
by fees or costs collected, including any fee collected from a state.
We propose removing Sec. 309.155(c) and redesignating Sec.
309.155(d), (e), (f), and (g) to (c), (d), (e), and (f), respectively.
Section 309.170 What statistical and narrative reporting requirements
apply to Tribal IV-D programs?
Section 309.170(b)(8) requires a Tribe or Tribal organization to
provide annual information and statistics on the total amount of fees
and costs recovered. We propose removing Sec. 309.170(b)(8) and
redesignating Sec. 309.170(b)(9) to (b)(8).
Section 310.10 What are the functional requirements for the Model
Tribal IV-D System?
Section 310.10(c) requires the Model Tribal IV-D System to record
and report any fees collected, either directly or by interfacing with
state or Tribal financial management and expenditure information. We
propose removing Sec. 310.10(c) and redesignating Sec. 310.10(d),
(e), (f), (g), and (h) to (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g), respectively.
Section 310.20 What are the conditions for funding the installation,
operation, maintenance and enhancement of Computerized Tribal IV-D
Systems and Office Automation?
Section 310.20(a) describes the conditions that must be met for
Federal financial participation for Computerized Tribal IV-D Systems.
We propose replacing ``90'' with ``100''.
Paperwork Reduction Act
No new information collection requirements are imposed by these
regulations.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Secretary certifies that, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), as enacted by
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354), this proposed rule
will not result in a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The primary impact is on Tribal governments. Tribal
governments are not considered small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Executive Orders 12866 and 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 meets the standards of Executive Orders
12866 and 13563 because it creates equity, promotes predictability, and
reduces burdens and hardships for Tribal child support enforcement
programs. The non-Federal share requirement limits growth, causes
disruptions, and creates instability. Eliminating it encourages
expansion of services and enforcement remedies, removes a financial
barrier for prospective Tribes and Tribal organizations, prevents
closure of existing Tribal child support enforcement programs, and
provides a permanent solution to longstanding problems. This will
ensure Tribal families receive child support services that reflect and
affirm their cultures and traditions and that promote parental
responsibility and increase disposable family income and financial
stability.
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this NPRM
is significant and was accordingly reviewed by OMB.
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) must be prepared for major rules
with economically significant effects ($100 million or more in any 1
year). ACF does not anticipate that this proposed rulemaking is likely
to have an economic impact of $100 million or more in any 1 year, and,
therefore, does not meet the definition of ``economically significant''
under Executive Order 12866. Based upon the increase in program
expenditures from existing Tribal child support enforcement programs
and the modest growth of new programs due to the elimination of the
non-Federal share, we anticipate that the costs associated with this
proposed rule will be the following: FY 2025 $17.2m; FY 2026 $19m; FY
2027 $26.4m; FY 2028 34.3m; and FY 2029 $42.6m.
[[Page 24534]]
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires
agencies to prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits
before issuing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure by
state, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for
inflation). That threshold level is currently approximately $164
million. This proposed rule does not impose any mandates on state,
local, or Tribal governments, or the private sector, that will result
in an annual expenditure of $164 million or more.
Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 requires Federal agencies to determine whether a proposed
policy or regulation may affect family well-being. If the agency's
determination is affirmative, then the agency must prepare an impact
assessment addressing seven criteria specified in the law. We certify
that we have assessed this proposed rule's impact on the well-being of
families. The purpose of the Tribal child support enforcement program
is to strengthen the financial and social stability of families. This
proposed rule eliminates the burden and hardships imposed by non-
Federal share requirement for Tribal child support enforcement
programs, which limits growth, causes disruptions, and creates
instability. Eliminating it encourages expansion of services and
enforcement remedies, removes a financial barrier for prospective
Tribes and Tribal organizations, and prevents closure of existing
Tribal child support enforcement programs. The proposed rule will have
a positive effect on family well-being. It will ensure Tribal families
receive child support services that reflect and affirm their cultures
and traditions and that promote parental responsibility and increase
disposable family income and financial stability.
Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 prohibits an agency from publishing any rule
that has federalism implications if the rule either imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on state and local governments and is not
required by statute, or the rule preempts state law, unless the agency
meets the consultation and funding requirements of section 6 of the
Executive Order. This proposed rule does not have federalism impact as
defined in the executive order.
List of Subjects
45 CFR Part 309
Child support, Grant programs--social programs, Indians--tribal
government, Reporting and record keeping requirements.
45 CFR Part 310
Child support, Grant programs--social programs, Indians.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs No. 93.563, Child
Support Enforcement Program.)
Xavier Becerra,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of Health
and Human Services proposes to amend 45 CFR parts 309 and 310 as set
forth below:
PART 309--TRIBAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (IV-D PROGRAM)
0
1. The authority citation for part 309 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 655(f) and 1302.
0
2. Amend Sec. 309.15 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(2)(iii); and
0
b. Removing (a)(2)(iv) and (v).
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 309.15 What is a Tribal IV-D program application?
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) A narrative justification for each cost category on the form.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 309.45 by revising paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 309.45 When and how may a Tribe or Tribal organization request
reconsideration of a disapproval action?
* * * * *
(g) Disapproval of start-up funding and a request for waiver of the
100-child rule is not subject to administrative appeal.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 309.75 by revising paragraph (e) introductory text and
removing paragraphs (e)(1) through (4) to read as follows:
Sec. 309.75 What administrative and management procedures must a
Tribe or Tribal organization include in a Tribal IV-D plan?
* * * * *
(e) Procedures that prohibit charging fees and recovering costs.
Sec. 309.85 [Amended]
0
5. Amend Sec. 309.85 by removing paragraph (a)(6) and redesignating
paragraph (a)(7) as new paragraph (a)(6).
0
6. Amend Sec. 309.130 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and (c)(2);
0
b. Removing paragraph (c)(3)(i);
0
c. Redesiginating paragraph (c)(3)(ii) as paragraph (c)(3) and revising
newly designated paragraph (c)(3);
0
d. Removing paragraph (d) and (e);
0
e. Redesignating paragraph (f) as paragraph (d) and revising newly
designated paragraph (d); and
0
f. Redesignating paragraphs (g) and (h) as paragraphs (e) and (f).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 309.130 How will Tribal IV-D programs be funded and what forms
are required?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) A narrative justification for each cost category on the form.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) Beginning with the first day of the first quarter of the
funding grant specified under Sec. 309.135(a)(2), a Tribe or Tribal
organization will receive Federal grant funds equal to 100 percent of
the total amount of approved and allowable expenditures made during
that period and thereafter for the administration of the Tribal child
support enforcement program.
(3) A Tribe or Tribal organization will receive Federal grant funds
equal to 100 percent of pre-approved costs of installing the Model
Tribal IV-D System.
(d) Increase in approved budget. (1) A Tribe or Tribal organization
may request an increase in the approved amount of its current budget by
submitting a revised SF 424A to ACF and explaining why it needs the
additional funds. The Tribe or Tribal organization should submit this
request at least 60 days before additional funds are needed, to allow
the Secretary adequate time to review the estimates and issue a revised
grant award, if appropriate.
(2) If the change in Tribal IV-D budget estimate results from a
change in the Tribal IV-D plan, the Tribe or Tribal organization must
submit a plan amendment in accordance with Sec. 309.35(e), a revised
SF 424, and a revised SF 424A with its request for additional funding.
The effective date of a plan amendment may not be earlier than the
first day of the fiscal quarter in which an approvable plan is
submitted in accordance with Sec. 309.35(f) of this part. The
Secretary must approve the plan amendment before approving any
additional funding.
[[Page 24535]]
Sec. 309.155 [Amended]
0
7. Amend Sec. 309.155 by removing paragraph (c) and redesignating
paragraphs (d) through (g) as paragraphs (c) through (f);
Sec. 309.170 [Amended]
0
8. Amend Sec. 309.170 by removing paragraph (b)(8) and redesignating
paragraph (b)(9) as new paragraph (b)(8)'
PART 310--TRIBAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (IV-D PROGRAM)
0
9. The authority citation for part 310 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 655(f) and 1302.
Sec. 310.10 [Amended]
0
10. Amend Sec. 310.10 by removing paragraph (c) and redesignating
paragraphs (d) through (h) as paragraphs (c) through (g).
0
11. Amend Sec. 310.20 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 310.20 What are the conditions for funding the installation,
operation, maintenance and enhancement of Computerized Tribal IV-D
Systems and Office Automation?
(a) Conditions that must be met for FFP at the applicable matching
rate in Sec. 309.130(c) of this chapter for Computerized Tribal IV-D
Systems. The following conditions must be met to obtain 100 percent FFP
in the costs of installation of the Model Tribal IV-D System and FFP at
the applicable matching rate under Sec. 309.130(c) of this chapter in
the costs of operation, maintenance, and enhancement of a Computerized
Tribal IV-D System:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-07861 Filed 4-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-42-P