[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 118 (Monday, June 20, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35787-35791]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14982]
========================================================================
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. 76, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2011 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 35787]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
7 CFR Parts 271, 273, and 281
RIN 0584-AD97
Updated Trafficking Definition and Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (SNAP)-FDPIR Dual Participation
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is proposing changes to
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) regulations
pertaining to SNAP client benefit use, participation of retail food
stores and wholesale food concerns in SNAP, and SNAP client
participation in the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations
(FDPIR). These changes to SNAP regulations address mandatory provisions
of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (hereinafter referred
to as ``the 2008 Farm Bill'') to allow for the disqualification of a
SNAP client who purchases, with SNAP benefits, products that have
container deposits for the purpose of subsequently discarding the
product and returning the container(s) in exchange for cash refund of
deposit(s) and/or resells or exchanges products purchased with SNAP
benefits for purposes of obtaining cash or other non-eligible items.
DATES: To be assured of consideration, comments on this proposed rule
must be received by the Food and Nutrition Service on or before August
19, 2011.
ADDRESSES: The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), USDA, invites
interested persons to submit comments on this proposed rule. Comments
may be submitted by one of the following methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Preferred method; follow the online instructions
for submitting comments on docket [insert docket number].
Mail: Comments should be addressed to Ronald Ward, Acting
Chief, Retailer Management and Issuance Branch, Benefit Redemption
Division, Rm. 418, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia 22302.
All comments submitted in response to this rule will be included in
the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised
that the substance of the comments and the identity of the individuals
or entities submitting the comments will be subject to public
disclosure. FNS will make the comments publicly available on the
Internet via: http://www.regulations.gov.
All submissions will be available for public inspection at the
address above during regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.)
Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Address any questions regarding this
rulemaking to Ronald Ward, Acting Chief, Retailer Management and
Issuance Branch, Benefit Redemption Division at the Food and Nutrition
Service, USDA, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia 22302. Mr.
Ward can also be reached by telephone at 703-305-2523 or by e-mail at
[email protected] during regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to
5:30 p.m.) Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Through existing authority under the Food and Nutrition Act of
2008, FNS is also proposing in this rulemaking to stipulate penalties
for certain Program abuses committed by retailers. These abuses include
stealing of SNAP benefits, by retailers, without client complicity, and
other forms of trafficking through complicit arrangements between the
retailer and the SNAP client. Examples of the latter would be the
purchase, by retailers, of products originally purchased by clients
with SNAP benefits and re-sold to stores in exchange for cash or other
non-eligible items; or retailers taking possession of SNAP client cards
and PINs, using the SNAP benefits to purchase stock for the store, and
subsequently returning the card and PIN to the client with cash or
other non-eligible items provided in exchange for having used the SNAP
benefit.
FNS will also address the mandatory 2008 Farm Bill provisions
requiring reciprocal disqualification in SNAP when an individual is
disqualified from FDPIR, and under existing authority, will clarify the
prohibition against dual participation in SNAP and FDPIR.
In this rule, FNS is proposing to revise SNAP regulations in
accordance with Section 4131 (Eligibility Disqualification) of the 2008
Farm Bill to update the definition of trafficking to include certain
Program abuses by clients. FNS is also taking this opportunity to
address certain retailer abuses of the Program. These types of abuse
are not specifically addressed in the current definition of
trafficking.
This rule also addresses Section 4211 (Assessing the Nutritional
Value of the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR)
Food Package) of the 2008 Farm Bill which requires, among other things,
reciprocal disqualification in SNAP when an individual is disqualified
from FDPIR. Proposed regulatory changes will codify the mandatory
statutory requirement to make reciprocal SNAP disqualification
mandatory in instances of disqualification from FDPIR.
Dual participation in SNAP and FDPIR is prohibited under existing
authority in the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 and is codified in
existing regulations. FNS is proposing only to make a technical
correction to existing regulations regarding this mandatory
prohibition.
The specific provisions are discussed below.
Updating the Definition of Trafficking
FNS has received reports from various stakeholders and the media
describing Program abuses by SNAP retailers and recipients. These
situations negatively impact Program integrity and divert benefits
intended to meet the dietary needs of the nation's neediest citizens.
Additionally, stakeholders have expressed frustration in not having
options for recourse in specific instances of fraud.
Specifically, stakeholders have witnessed SNAP clients purchasing
large quantities of products sold in containers that require deposits.
The clients have then taken these products outside of the store
location, discarded the contents, and subsequently returned to the
store location to claim the container deposit amounts in cash.
[[Page 35788]]
Currently, bottle deposits are paid for with SNAP benefits when the
item is purchased. Regulations do not require separating the container
deposits from the eligible food items, as the container is not
optional. While regulations prohibit exchanging cash for SNAP benefits,
container deposits are difficult to track back to SNAP purchases. In
many instances, containers are returned by persons other than the
purchaser and in some instances returns are handled by bottle return
machines. None-the-less, clients who intentionally purchased products
in containers for purposes of disposing of the products and exchanging
the containers for cash are, in effect, trafficking without a complicit
retailer.
Furthermore, clients have sold food purchased with SNAP benefits in
exchange for cash. This can occur in collusion with the owner (or
employee) of a SNAP authorized store who requests that the client
purchase specific items at an alternate location for subsequent
purchase by the complicit retailer. SNAP clients have also purchased
large amounts of products such as soft drinks and then resold them for
cash to other individuals once outside of the store.
On the retailer side, SNAP authorized retailers have been found
abusing the Program by stealing SNAP benefits from unwitting clients.
While Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) has largely reduced SNAP fraud,
it has introduced a new opportunity for retailers to steal benefits
from clients, which did not exist when benefits were issued in the form
of paper coupons. In this scenario, retailers and/or store employees
steal client card numbers and personal identification numbers (PINs),
and subsequently debit benefits from client accounts using manual key
entry of the card and PIN number without client knowledge or consent.
Retailers may use store cameras, or simply observe and capture EBT
client card information, including PINs, in order to undertake these
fraudulent transactions later.
Penalties for SNAP clients and/or retailers who abuse the Program
through the exchange of benefits, i.e. trafficking, are already defined
in regulation. The current definition of trafficking in SNAP benefits
is as follows: ``Trafficking means the buying or selling of coupons,
ATP cards or other benefit instruments for cash or consideration other
than eligible food; or the exchange of firearms, ammunition,
explosives, or controlled substances, as defined in section 802 of
title 21, United States Code, for coupons.''
Because the definition of trafficking does not currently include
the scenarios described above, FNS has had difficulty directly
assessing penalties against clients and retailers who engage in these
acts. At times, FNS has had to rely on State and Federal law
enforcement agencies to pursue criminal charges against the violators.
As a result, FNS is proposing to update the definition of
trafficking to incorporate stealing of SNAP benefits, re-selling
products purchased with SNAP benefits for the express purpose of
obtaining cash or other ineligible items, purchasing products purchased
with SNAP benefits for the express purpose of providing cash or other
ineligible items to SNAP clients, and discarding products purchased
with SNAP benefits for the express purpose of obtaining cash for
container deposits. Moreover, the definition is being updated, in
general, to include other instances where the client and the retailer
collude to exchange SNAP benefits for cash or something other than
eligible food.
Appropriate penalties for SNAP clients and/or retailers who are
found by a court or administrative agency to have trafficked based on
the revised definition are already established in current regulations
at 7 CFR 273.16 and 7 CFR parts 278 and 279.
Dual Participation in SNAP/FDPIR Correction
FDPIR provides commodity foods to low-income households, including
the elderly, living on Indian reservations, and Native American
families residing in designated areas near reservations and in the
State of Oklahoma.
Dual participation in both SNAP and FDPIR was already prohibited by
regulation and statute prior to the 2008 Farm Bill. However, a
technical correction is necessary in Sec. 281.1(c) to amend an
incorrect regulatory reference. This proposed change will not impact
current policy.
Comparable Disqualification From SNAP for Clients Disqualified From
FDPIR
Currently only FDPIR has regulations prohibiting individuals
disqualified from SNAP for intentional program violations from then
participating in FDPIR during the period of disqualification. As a
result, individuals who were disqualified from the FDPIR are still able
to then apply for SNAP and receive benefits during the FDPIR
disqualification period. Section 4211 of the 2008 Farm Bill mandates
that reciprocal disqualification apply to both SNAP and FDPIR.
Therefore, States can no longer allow an individual who is disqualified
from FDPIR to then participate in SNAP during the disqualification
period.
This proposed regulation will require reciprocal action in SNAP in
instances of disqualification from FDPIR.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Need for Action
The proposed rule is needed to codify nondiscretionary Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefit issuance provisions of the
Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (2008 Farm Bill) (Pub. L.
110-246) and to address retailer Program violations.
Benefits
This rulemaking will codify provisions in the Food and Nutrition
Act of 2008 that improve Program integrity, enhance the Program's
ability to serve those who are truly in need, and help to ensure that
SNAP benefits are used as intended. While committed to providing vital
nutrition assistance to our most vulnerable Americans, protecting
taxpayer dollars and ensuring program integrity are equally important.
Once final, these regulations will allow the Department to take
appropriate action against retailers who are stealing SNAP benefits
from clients or colluding with clients to traffic benefits, and will
allow State agencies to take appropriate action against violating
clients. The regulations will also ensure that clients who commit
intentional program violations in FDPIR are not able to participate in
SNAP while serving their FDPIR disqualification, and will ensure that
no client is able to dually participate in SNAP and FDPIR.
Costs
This proposed rule will primarily codify mandatory provisions of
the statute. FNS anticipates that the rule will have a nominal cost
impact on States that pursue clients who are defrauding the Program in
the ways described. As FNS has an existing process for managing
retailer compliance, the cost of pursuing retailers who violate Program
rules in the manner described is also nominal. The problems being
addressed in the proposed rule are extremely unusual and FNS has no
data on which to base an estimate of their frequency or the amount of
benefits that might be involved. The proposed rule also updates the
existing definition of trafficking, and as such there are no
incremental cost or benefit repercussions.
State SNAP and FDPIR agencies will be required to perform checks
for dual participation in their Programs and to
[[Page 35789]]
ensure that clients disqualified from either SNAP or FDPIR are not
allowed to participate in the alternate Program. Cross-Program checks
for duplicate participation in SNAP and FDPIR are already required and
checks for ensuring that clients disqualified from SNAP or FDPIR are
not participating in the alternate Program should follow a similar
process; therefore the checks will not significantly impact
administrative costs.
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 rule has been designated a ``significant regulatory action,''
although not economically significant, under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, the rule has been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed with regard to the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612). It has been certified
that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. Departmental Field, Regional,
and Area Offices, retailers and other firms participating or applying
to participate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, State
agencies that distribute Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
benefits and State agencies that administer Food Distribution of Indian
Reservations, are the entities affected by this change.
Public Law 104-4
Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) Title II of UMRA
establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and
the private sector. Under Section 202 of the UMRA, the Department
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, or Tribal governments in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. When such a statement is needed for a rule, section 205 of
the UMRA generally requires the Department to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least
costly, more cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. This rule 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. This rule is, therefore, not subject
to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Executive Order 12372
SNAP is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under
No. 10.551. For the reasons set forth in the Final Rule codified in 7
CFR part 3015, Subpart V and related Notice (48 FR 29115), this Program
is excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372, which requires
intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials.
Federalism Summary Impact Statement
Executive Order 13132 requires Federal agencies to consider the
impact of their regulatory actions on State and local governments.
Where such actions have Federalism implications, agencies are directed
to provide a statement for inclusion in the preamble to the regulations
describing the agency's considerations in terms of the three categories
called for under Section (6)(b)(2)(B) of the Executive Order 13132. FNS
has determined that this rule does not have Federalism implications.
This rule does not impose substantial or direct compliance costs on
State and local governments. Therefore, under Section 6(b) of the
Executive Order, a Federalism summary impact statement is not required.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This proposed rule is intended to have preemptive
effects with respect to any State or local laws, regulations or
policies which conflict with its provisions or which would otherwise
impede its full implementation. This proposed rule is not intended to
have retroactive effects unless so specified in the Effective Date
paragraph of the final rule. Prior to any judicial challenge to the
provisions of this proposed rule or the application of its provisions,
all applicable administrative procedures must be exhausted.
Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 13175 requires Federal agencies to consult and
coordinate with Tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies
that have Tribal implications, including regulations, legislative
comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or
actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. In late 2010 and early 2011,
USDA engaged in a series of consultative sessions to obtain input by
Tribal officials or their designees concerning the impact of this rule
on the Tribe or Indian Tribal governments, or whether this rule may
preempt Tribal law. Reports from these sessions for consultation will
be made part of the USDA annual reporting on Tribal Consultation and
Collaboration. Each session was fully transcribed and the comments
received relative to this proposed regulation follow:
One commenter expressed general concern regarding the disparity in
benefit value as a result of the increase in SNAP benefits following
the American Recovery and Reinvestment and Act (ARRA); FDPIR benefits
were not subject to an ARRA increase.
One commenter noted that County level SNAP office staff should have
been in attendance at this consultation; if county level staff is not
aware of the prohibition relative to dual participation, then they will
not abide by that prohibition. This was reiterated by a second
commenter who noted that County level SNAP staff should be in the
communication loop and receive training. FNS noted that a process of
notifying all stakeholders would occur once this regulation is
finalized. A third commenter made a procedural recommendation requiring
that SNAP certification staff contact the Indian Tribal Organization
(ITO) to ensure that applicant clients are not dually participating in
FDPIR.
One commenter expressed support for the reciprocal SNAP
disqualification that would be based on an intentional program
violation in FDPIR.
One commenter noted that direct access to County level SNAP staff
would be beneficial; currently the ITO calls the County level office
and is subject to an automated message when checking dual
participation.
[[Page 35790]]
Several commenters noted that access to an automated system for
checking dual participation and reciprocal disqualification is
practically necessary to make the process work, and that the current
process of checking paper printouts is not practical. FNS noted that
some ITO's have successfully executed a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) with the State SNAP agency or county SNAP offices that allow them
view-only access to State certification systems for these kinds of
checks. Some participating ITO's noted difficulties in getting such
MOU's in place. FNS committed to assist ITO's with this process in
Oklahoma, and more broadly, to seek examples of successfully executed
MOU's and provide those to appropriate stakeholders.
USDA will respond in a timely and meaningful manner to all Tribal
government requests for consultation concerning this rule and will
provide additional venues, such as webinars and teleconferences, to
periodically host collaborative conversations with Tribal leaders and
their representatives concerning ways to improve this rule in Indian
country.
We are unaware of any current Tribal laws that could be in conflict
with the proposed rule. We request that commenters address any concerns
in this regard in their responses.
Civil Rights Impact Analysis
FNS has reviewed this rule in accordance with Departmental
Regulations 4300-4, ``Civil Rights Impact Analysis'', and 1512-1,
``Regulatory Decision Making Requirements.'' After a careful review of
the rule's intent and provisions, FNS has determined that this rule
will not in any way limit or reduce the ability of protected classes of
individuals to receive SNAP benefits on the basis of their race, color,
national origin, sex, age, disability, religion or political belief nor
will it have a differential impact on minority owned or operated
business establishments, and women owned or operated business
establishments that participate in SNAP.
The regulation affects or may potentially affect the retail food
stores and wholesale food concerns that participate in (accept or
redeem) SNAP. The only retail food stores and wholesale food concerns
that will be directly affected, however, are those firms that violate
SNAP rules and regulations. FNS does not collect data from retail food
stores or wholesale food concerns regarding any of the protected
classes under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As long as a
retail food store or wholesale food concern meets the eligibility
criteria stipulated in the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 and SNAP
regulations, they can participate in SNAP. Also, FNS specifically
prohibits retailers and wholesalers that participate in SNAP to engage
in actions that discriminate based on race, color, national origin,
sex, age, disability, religion, or political belief. This rule will not
change any requirements related to the eligibility or participation of
protected classes or individuals, minority-owned or operated business
establishments, or women-owned or operated business establishments in
SNAP. As a result, this rule will have no differential impact on
protected classes of individuals, minority-owned or operated business
establishments, or women-owned or operated business establishments.
Further, FNS specifically prohibits the State and local government
agencies that administer the Program from engaging in actions that
discriminate based on race, color, national origin, gender, age,
disability, marital or family status. Regulations at 7 CFR 272.6
specifically state that ``State agencies shall not discriminate against
any applicant or participant in any aspect of program administration,
including, but not limited to, the certification of households, the
issuance of coupons, the conduct of fair hearings, or the conduct of
any other program service for reasons of age, race, color, sex,
handicap, religious creed, national origin, or political beliefs.
Discrimination in any aspect of the program administration is
prohibited by these regulations, according to the Act. * * *
Enforcement may be brought under any applicable Federal law. Title VI
complaints shall be processed in accord with 7 CFR part 15.'' Where
State agencies have options, and they choose to implement a certain
provision, they must implement it in such a way that it complies with
the regulations at 7 CFR 272.6.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chap. 35; see 5 CFR
1320) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approve
all collections of information by a Federal agency before they can be
implemented. Respondents are not required to respond to any collection
of information unless it displays a current valid OMB control number.
This rule does not contain information collection requirements subject
to approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
This proposed rule will not affect the reporting and recordkeeping
burden and does not contain additional burden requirements subject to
OMB approval other than those that have been previously approved in
OMB 0584-0064, expiration date 03/31/2013, by OMB under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
E-Government Act Compliance
FNS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act of 2002 to
promote the use of the Internet and other information technologies to
provide increased opportunities for citizen access to government
information and services, and for other purposes.
Lists of Subjects
7 CFR Part 271
Food stamps, Grant programs--Social programs, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
7 CFR Part 273
Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Claims, Employment,
Food stamps, Fraud, Government employees, Grant programs--Social
programs, Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Students, Supplemental Security Income, (SSI), wages.
7 CFR Part 281
Administrative practice and procedure, Food stamps, Grant
programs--Social programs, Indians.
Accordingly, 7 CFR Parts 271, 273 and 281 are proposed to be
amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR parts 271, 273 and 281 continue
to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2011-2036.
PART 271--GENERAL INFORMATION AND DEFINITIONS
2. In part 271:
a. Remove the words ``the Food Stamp Program'' or ``FSP'' wherever
they appear and add, in their place, the word ``SNAP'';
b. Remove the words ``food stamps'' wherever they appear and add,
in their place, the words ``SNAP benefits'';
c. Remove the words ``food stamp'' wherever they appear and add, in
their place, the word ``SNAP'';
3. In Sec. 271.2:
a. Remove the words ``Food Stamp Act of 1977'' and add in their
place the words ``Food and Nutrition Act of 2008'' except in the
definition ``Food Stamp Act'' wherever they appear;
b. Remove the words ``Food Stamp Act'' add in their place, the
words ``Food and Nutrition Act of 2008''
[[Page 35791]]
except in the definition ``Food Stamp Act'' wherever they appear;
c. The definition of Trafficking is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 271.2. Definitions.
* * * * *
Trafficking means the buying, selling, stealing, or otherwise
effecting an exchange of SNAP benefits issued and accessed via
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards, card numbers and personal
identification numbers (PINs), or by manual voucher and signature, for
cash or consideration other than eligible food, either directly,
indirectly, in complicity or collusion with others, or acting alone;
the exchange of firearms, ammunition, explosives, or controlled
substances, as defined in section 802 of title 21, United States Code,
for SNAP benefits; the purchase with SNAP benefits of products that
have container deposits for purposes of subsequently discarding the
product and returning the container(s) in exchange for cash refund
deposits; the re-sale of products purchased with SNAP benefits for
purposes of obtaining cash or consideration other than eligible food;
or the purchase of products originally purchased with SNAP benefits and
re-sold in exchange for cash or consideration other than eligible food.
* * * * *
PART 273--CERTIFICATION OF ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOLDS
3. In Sec. 273.11:
a. Remove the words ``food stamps'' wherever they appear and add,
in their place, the words ``SNAP benefits'';
b. Remove the words ``food stamp'' wherever they appear and add, in
their place, the word ``SNAP'';
c. Add two new sentences at the end of paragraph (k) introductory
text.
d. Add a new sentence to the end of paragraph (k)(6).
The additions read as follows:
Sec. 273.11 Action on households with special circumstances.
* * * * *
(k) * * * In the case of disqualification from the Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) for an intentional
program violation as described under Sec. 253.8, the State agency
shall impose the same disqualification on the member of the household
under SNAP. The State agency must, in cooperation with the appropriate
FDPIR agency, develop a procedure that ensures that these household
members are identified.
* * * * *
(6) * * * In instances where the disqualification is a reciprocal
action based on disqualification from the Food Distribution Program on
Indian Reservations, the length of disqualification shall mirror the
period prescribed by the Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations.
* * * * *
PART 281--ADMINISTRATION OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM (SNAP) ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS
4. Revise the heading of part 281 to read as set forth above
5. In part 281:
a. Remove the words ``the Food Stamp Program'' wherever they appear
and add, in their place, the word ``SNAP'';
b. Remove the words ``Food Stamp Act of 1977'' wherever they appear
and add, in their place, the words ``Food and Nutrition Act of 2008'';
c. Remove the words ``1977 Food Stamp Act'' wherever they appear
and add, in their place, the words ``Food and Nutrition Act of 2008'';
6. In Sec. 281.1 remove the regulatory reference ``Sec.
283.7(e)'' and add, in its place, the regulatory reference ``Sec.
253.7(e)''.
Dated: May 26, 2011.
Janey Thornton,
Acting Under Secretary, Food Nutrition and Consumer Services.
[FR Doc. 2011-14982 Filed 6-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P