[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 10 (Friday, January 14, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2358-2361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-936]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 2358]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
7 CFR Part 253
RIN: 0584-AC81
Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations: Income
Deductions and Miscellaneous Provisions
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed Rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed rule would amend regulations for the Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations. The changes would improve
program service by allowing households two income deductions when
proper verification is provided. The first income deduction would be
given to households that pay legally required child support for a
nonhousehold member. This change conforms to an income deduction
allowed under the Food Stamp Program. The second income deduction would
be provided to households that pay the premium for their Medicare Part
B medical insurance. This deduction was prompted by a resolution passed
by the National Association of Food Distribution Programs on Indian
Reservations. This rule would also make technical amendments, such as
changing outdated terminology, and revising or removing provisions that
are obsolete or have changed.
DATES: Send your comments to reach us on or before March 14, 2000.
Comments received after the above date will not be considered in making
our decision on the proposed rule.
ADDRESSES: You can mail or hand-deliver comments to Lillie F. Ragan,
Assistant Branch Chief, Household Programs Branch, Food Distribution
Division, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Room 510, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia 22302-1594.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lillie F. Ragan at the above address
or telephone (703) 305-2662.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Public Comment Procedures
II. Procedural Matters
III. Background and Discussion of the Proposed Rule
I. Public Comment Procedures
Your written comments on this proposed rule should be specific,
should be confined to issues pertinent to the proposed rule, and should
explain the reason for any change you recommend. Where possible, you
should reference the specific section or paragraph of the proposal you
are addressing. Comments received after the close of the comment period
(see DATES) will not be considered or included in the Administrative
Record for the final rule.
The comments, including names, street addressees, and other contact
information of respondents, will be available for public review at the
Food and Nutrition Service, 4501 Ford Avenue, Room 612, Alexandria,
Virginia, during regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.), Mondays
through Fridays, except Federal holidays.
II. Procedural Matters
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations
that are simple and easy to understand. President Clinton's
Presidential memorandum of June 1, 1998, requires us to write new
regulations in plain language. We invite your comments on how to make
these regulations easier to understand, including answers to questions
such as the following:
(1) Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
(2) Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that
interferes with its clarity?
(3) Does the format of the rule (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) make it more or less clear?
(4) Would the rule be easier to understand if it was divided into
more (but shorter) sections?
(5) Is the description of the rule in the preamble section entitled
``Background and Discussion of the Proposed Rule'' helpful in
understanding the rule? How could this description be more helpful in
making the rule easier to understand?
Executive Order 12866
This propose rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed
by the Office of Management and Budget.
Public Law 104-4
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub.
L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the
Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and final
rules with ``Federal mandates'' that may result in expenditures to
State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the
private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. When such a
statement is needed for a rule, section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires the Food and Nutrition Service to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least
costly, more cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule.
This rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, and tribal
governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any one
year. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections
202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Executive Order 12372
The program addressed in this action is listed in the Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.570, and is subject to the
provisions of Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental
consultation with State and local officials (7 CFR part 3015, Subpart
V, and final rule-related notices published at 48 FR 29114, June 24,
1983, and 49 FR 22676, May 31, 1984).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed with regard to the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601-612). The
Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Service has
[[Page 2359]]
certified that this action will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. While program participants and
Indian Tribal Organizations and State agencies that administer the Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) will be affected by
this rulemaking, the economic effect will not be significant.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. The rule is intended to have preemptive effect
with respect to any State or local laws, regulations or policies which
conflict with its provisions or which would otherwise impede its full
implementation. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.
There are no administrative procedures which must be exhausted prior to
any judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule or the
applications of its provisions.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507), this proposed rule will contain information collections that are
subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget;
therefore, FNS is submitting for public comment the changes in the
information collection burden that would result from adoption of the
proposals in the rule.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
To be assured of consideration, comments must be postmarked on or
before March 14, 2000. Please send comments to Lillie F. Ragan,
Assistant Branch Chief, Household Programs Branch, Food Distribution
Division, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Room 510, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia 22302-1594, and
to Lori Schack, Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, DC 20503.
All comments will be summarized and included in the request for OMB
approval of the proposed changes in the information collection burden.
All comments will become a matter of public record. For further
information, or for copies of the information collections discussed
below, please contact Ms. Ragan at the above address or telephone (703)
305-2662.
Title: Food Distribution Forms (This information collection burden
consolidates the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for 7 CFR
parts 240, 247, 250, 251, 252, 253 and 254.)
OMB Number: 0584-0293.
Expiration Date: 1/31/2001.
Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Abstract: The reporting requirement currently approved for 7 CFR
253.7, which addresses the certification of households to participate,
would be modified by this proposed rule. The rule would allow income
deductions for legally required child support payments for a
nonhousehold member and Medicare Part B premium payments, and would
require verification of these household expenses. The current reporting
burden estimates associated with the certification of households to
participate in FDPIR (7 CFR 253.7) must be modified to include the
proposed verification requirements. We estimate that the verification
requirements of this rule will increase the reporting burden by
approximately 2 minutes for those application/recertification actions
affected by this rule. When averaged with application/recertification
actions not affected by this rule, the manhours per response is
increased by .01 hours.
The proposed income deductions and the reporting burden associated
with the proposed verification requirements are not expected to affect
a large percentage of FDPIR households. In regard to the income
deduction for legally obligated child support payments, we expect that
only 1 percent of the participant population will receive this
deduction. This projection is based on the March 28, 1998,
Characteristics of Food Stamp Households, Fiscal Year 1996, which
reports that approximately 1 percent of food stamp households receive a
child support deduction. We applied this percentage in determining the
number of FDPIR participants that would be affected by this proposed
rule, and we increased the reporting burden estimate for that group
accordingly. Our estimate also reflects applicant households that would
become eligible as a result of the proposed child support income
deduction.
In regard to the income deduction for Medicare Part B premium
payments, we note that approximately 29 percent of FDPIR participating
households receive Social Security payments (Evaluation of the Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, Volume 1: Final Report,
(June 15, 1990)). We assume that all of these households have the
Medicare Part B premium automatically withheld from their monthly
Social Security payments. Our proposed estimate for the reporting
burden associated with this income deduction reflects an increase for
this subgroup--FDPIR participants that receive Social Security
payments. Our estimate also reflects applicant households that would
become income eligible as a result of the proposed income deduction for
Medicare Part B premium payments.
Respondents: State, Local, or Tribal Government; Individuals or
households; business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions;
Federal Government.
Estimated Number of Respondents: Total package--368,523 (Current);
total package--368,590 (Proposed).
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: Total package--
918,526 (Current); total package--918,593 (Proposed).
Estimate of Burden: Total package--1,154,502 (Current); total
package--1,154,581 (Proposed).
The present and proposed estimates of the reporting burden for
information collections affected by this rule are detailed below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Responses Manhours
per per Total
respondents response manhours
------------------------------------------------------------------------
253.7 Certification of Households to Participate:
Present.............................. 4500 0.5 2250
Proposed............................. 4567 0.51 2329
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 2360]]
II. Background and Discussion of the Proposed Rule
The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is proposing to amend the
regulations for the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations
(FDPIR) at 7 CFR part 253. The changes would improve program service by
allowing households two income deductions when proper verification is
provided. The first income deduction would be given to households that
pay legally required child support for a nonhousehold member. The
second income deduction would be provided to households that pay the
premium for their Medicare Part B medical insurance. This rule would
also make technical amendments, such as changing outdated terminology,
and revising or removing provisions that are obsolete or have changed.
These amendments are discussed in more detail below.
In the following discussion and regulatory text, we use the term
``State agency,'' as defined at 7 CFR 253.2, to include Indian Tribal
Organizations (ITOs) authorized to operate FDPIR.
1. Income Deduction for Child Support Payments
This proposed rule would amend 7 CFR 253.6(f) to allow an income
deduction for legally required child support payments made by a
household member to or for a nonhousehold member. This includes
payments made to a third party on behalf of the nonhousehold member
(vendor payments) and amounts paid toward overdue child support
(arrearages). Alimony payments are not considered child support
payments. This provision is intended to encourage non-custodial parents
to fully comply with their child support obligations. At the same time,
the deduction would result in a more accurate reflection of the paying
household's reduced ability to buy food. The Food Stamp Program already
treats child support payments this way.
2. Income Deduction for Medicare Part B Premium
FNS is also proposing to amend the regulations at 7 CFR 253.6(f) to
allow an income deduction to cover the full amount of the Medicare Part
B (Medical Insurance) premium. In most cases, the amount of the premium
is withheld automatically from the Social Security, Railroad
Retirement, or Civil Service Retirement payments. In some cases,
Medicare beneficiaries are billed quarterly for this premium. (In 1999,
the monthly premium for Part B is $45.50).
This income deduction would not be allowed in those cases where a
State has opted to pay the Medicare premium on behalf of its low-income
residents. In addition, household members who are not Medicare
beneficiaries because they receive their health care through the Indian
Health Service would not be allowed this income deduction.
This income deduction was developed in consultation with the
National Association of Food Distribution Programs on Indian
Reservations (NAFDPIR). NAFDPIR requested implementation of this income
deduction on May 4, 1998, in one of several resolutions passed at its
1998 annual meeting in San Diego, California. The deduction in this
rule addresses a clear and present need identified by NAFDPIR. It would
positively impact an extremely needy segment of the participant
population: low-income elderly and disabled Native Americans subsisting
on fixed incomes and often living in isolated areas without access to
supplemental sources of nutrition such as the Emergency Food Assistance
Program, the Child and Adult Care Food Program, and the Commodity
Supplemental Food Program. Appropriate nutrition supplementation and
nutrition education through FDPIR may help them to live independently
and reduce the possibility that they will need costly institutional
care. This income deduction is similar, but not identical, to the
deduction allowed under the Food Stamp Program for medical expenses.
3. Mandatory Verification
FNS is also proposing to amend the regulations at 7 CFR
253.7(a)(6)(i) to require the verification of the two income deductions
that would be implemented by this rule:
a. Legal obligation and actual child support payments--The State
agency must obtain verification of the household's legal obligation to
pay child support, the amount of the obligation, and the monthly amount
of child support the household actually pays. Documentation that
verifies the household's legal obligation to pay child support, such as
a court order, cannot be used to verify the household's actual monthly
child support payments.
b. Medicare Part B Premium--The State agency must obtain
verification of the household's payment of the Medicare Part B Premium.
Documentation of this expense could include a copy of the Social
Security benefit statement for the current calendar year (SSA-4926-SM),
which identifies the amount of the Medicare Part B Premium deducted
from the monthly Social Security benefit, or a paid receipt for
Medicare Part B Premium payments paid directly to Medicare by the
household.
4. Miscellaneous Technical Changes
Nomenclature Corrections--Sec. 253.3(d); Sec. 253.5(a)(2)(vii);
Sec. 253.6(e)(2)(i)(C); Sec. 253.6(e)(2)(ii)(A);
Sec. 253.6(e)(2)(iii)(B).
Legislative changes in recent years have resulted in revisions to
program titles referenced in 7 CFR part 253. Other FNS program
initiatives have prompted changes in terms commonly used among FNS
programs. This rule would amend the FDPIR regulations to replace the
title ``Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program'' with the
title ``Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program,'' and replace
the acronym ``AFDC'' with the acronym ``TANF'' wherever the outdated
terms appear. Similarly, 7 CFR part 253 would be amended to replace the
title ``Comprehensive Employment and Training Act'' with the title
``Job Training Partnership Act,'' and to replace the acronym ``CETA''
with the acronym ``JTPA'' wherever the outdated terms appear. In
addition, Sec. 253.3(d) would be amended to replace the phrase ``the
four food groups'' with the phrase ``USDA Food Guide Pyramid.''
References to Obsolete Food Stamp Program Provisions--
Sec. 253.6(e)(1)(ii); Sec. 253.5(f)(2) 7 CFR part 253 references Food
Stamp Program provisions that have changed or become obsolete. This
rule would correct these references. First, Sec. 253.6(e)(1)(ii) would
be amended to reflect an earlier change under the Food Stamp Program to
adjust the income eligibility standards once a year on October 1,
rather than twice a year on January 1 and July 1. The change to an
annual adjustment under the Food Stamp Program was effective on July 1,
1988 (see interim rule and correction published on September 29, 1987
(52 FR 36390)). We have been making annual adjustments to the FDPIR
income eligibility standards since that time, but the regulations at
Sec. 253.6(e)(1)(ii) had not been corrected.
In addition, Sec. 253.5(f)(2) references an obsolete Food Stamp
Program requirement that State agencies allow public attendance at
formal certification training sessions. This rule would delete
Sec. 253.5(f)(2), accordingly.
Obsolete Sources of Income and Resources--Sec. 253.6(d)(2)(iv);
Sec. 253.6(e)(3)(x) Sec. 253.6(d)(2)(iv) and Sec. 253.6(e)(3)(x) list
sources of income that are excluded under Federal statute from
consideration as income or resources, respectively. We are aware that
two of these types of payments have been discontinued and wish to take
this
[[Page 2361]]
opportunity to delete them from the FDPIR regulations. First, the
resource and income exclusion provisions at Sec. 253.6(d)(2)(iv)(F) and
Sec. 253.6(e)(3)(x)(G) would be deleted. These paragraphs refer to
payments provided under the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act
(CETA). Also, Sec. 253.6(e)(3)(x)(F), which references payments by the
Community Services Administration for the Crisis Intervention Program,
would be deleted.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 253
Administrative practice and procedure, Food assistance programs,
Grant programs, Social programs, Indians, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Surplus agricultural commodities.
Accordingly, 7 CFR part 253 is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 253--ADMINISTRATION OF THE FOOD DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM FOR
HOUSEHOLDS ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 253 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 91 Stat. 958 (7 U.S.C. 2011-2032).
2. In Sec. 253.3, revise the third sentence of paragraph (d) to
read as follows:
Sec. 253.3 Availability of commodities.
* * * * *
(d) * * * The food package offered to each household by the State
agency shall contain a variety of foods from each of the food groups in
the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations Monthly
Distribution Guide Rates by Household Size--Vegetables, Fruit, Bread-
Cereal-Rice-Pasta, Meat-Poultry-Fish-Dry Beans-Eggs-Nuts, Milk-Yogurt-
Cheese, and Fats-Oils-Sweets. * * *
Secs. 253.5 and 253.6 [Amended]
3. In Sec. 253.5(a)(2)(vii) and Sec. 253.6(e)(2)(iii)(B), remove
the acronym ``AFDC'' and add in its place the acronym ``TANF''.
Sec. 253.5 [Amended]
4. In Sec. 253.5, remove paragraph (f)(2), and redesignate
paragraph (f)(3) as paragraph (f)(2).
5. In Sec. 253.6:
a. Remove paragraph (d)(2)(iv)(F);
b. Amend paragraph (e)(1)(ii) by removing the words ``January 1 and
July 1'' and adding, in their place, the words ``October 1'';
c. Amend paragraph (e)(2)(i)(C) by removing the words
``Comprehensive Employment and Training Act'' and adding, in their
place, the words ``Job Training Partnership Act'';
d. Amend paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(A) by removing the words ``Aid to
Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)'' and adding, in their place,
the words ``Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)'';
e. Remove paragraphs (e)(3)(x)(F) and (e)(3)(x)(G); and
f. Add new paragraphs (f)(3) and (f)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 253.6 Eligibility of households.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(3) Households will receive a deduction for legally required child
support payments paid by a household member to or for a nonhousehold
member, including payments made to a third party on behalf of the
nonhousehold member (vendor payments). The State agency must allow a
deduction for amounts paid towards overdue child support (arrearages).
Alimony payments made to or for a nonhousehold member cannot be
included in the child support deduction.
(4) Households will receive a deduction for the full amount of the
Medicare Part B medical insurance premium that is withheld from the
Federal retirement or disability payment of a household member or is
paid by a household member directly to Medicare. This income deduction
is not allowed in situations where the premium is paid by the State on
behalf of the Medicare beneficiary or where household members are not
Medicare beneficiaries because they receive their health care through
the Indian Health Service.
6. In Sec. 253.7, revise paragraph (a)(6)(i) to reads as follows:
Sec. 253.7 Certification of households.
(a) * * *
(6) * * *
(i) Mandatory verification.--(A) Gross non-exempt income. The State
agency must obtain verification of each household's gross non-exempt
income prior to certification. Households certified under the expedited
service processing standards at paragraph (a)(9) of this section are
not subject to this requirement. Income does not need to be verified to
the exact dollar amount unless the household's eligibility would be
affected, since Food Distribution Program benefits are not reduced as
income rises. If the eligibility worker is unable to verify the
household's income, the worker must determine an amount to be used for
certification purposes based on the best available information. Reasons
for inability to verify income include failure of the person or
organization providing the income to cooperate with the household and
the State agency, or lack of other sources of verification.
(B) Legal obligation and actual child support payments. The State
agency must obtain verification of the household's legal obligation to
pay child support, the amount of the obligation, and the monthly amount
of child support the household actually pays. Documentation that
verifies the household's legal obligation to pay child support, such as
a court order, cannot be used to verify the household's actual monthly
child support payments.
(C) Medicare Part B medical insurance premium. The State agency
must obtain verification of the household's payment of the Medicare
Part B medical insurance premium. Documentation of this expense could
include:
(1) A copy of the Social Security benefit statement for the current
calendar year (SSA-4926-SM), which identifies the amount of the
Medicare Part B premium deducted from the monthly Social Security
benefit; or
(2) A receipt for Medicare Part B premium payments paid directly to
Medicare by the household.
* * * * *
Dated: January 6, 2000.
Samuel Chambers, Jr.,
Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
[FR Doc. 00-936 Filed 1-13-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-U