Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations: Income Deductions and Miscellaneous Provisions

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changing outdated terminology, and revising or removing provisions that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