Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

Federal RegisterFeb 13, 2012

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

REGULATORY INFORMATION SERVICE CENTER

Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

AGENCY:

Regulatory Information Service Center.

ACTION:

Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions.

SUMMARY:

The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that agencies publish semiannual regulatory agendas in the

Federal Register

describing regulatory actions they are developing that may have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 602). Executive Order 12866 “Regulatory Planning and Review,” signed September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51735), and Office of Management and Budget memoranda implementing section 4 of that Order establish minimum standards for agencies' agendas, including specific types of information for each entry.

The

Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

(Unified Agenda) helps agencies fulfill these requirements. All Federal regulatory agencies have chosen to publish their regulatory agendas as part of the Unified Agenda.

Editions of the Unified Agenda prior to fall 2007 were printed in their entirety in the

Federal Register

. Beginning with the fall 2007 edition, the Internet is the basic means for conveying regulatory agenda information to the maximum extent legally permissible. The complete Unified Agenda for fall 2011, which contains the regulatory agendas for 59 Federal agencies, is available to the public at

http://reginfo.gov.

The fall 2011 Unified Agenda publication appearing in the

Federal Register

consists of agency regulatory flexibility agendas, in accordance with the publication requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Agency regulatory flexibility agendas contain only those Agenda entries for rules that are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and entries that have been selected for periodic review under section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

ADDRESSES:

Regulatory Information Service Center (MI), General Services Administration, One Constitution Square, 1275 First Street NE., 651A, Washington, DC 20417.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information about specific regulatory actions, please refer to the agency contact listed for each entry.

To provide comment on or to obtain further information about this publication, contact: John C. Thomas, Executive Director, Regulatory Information Service Center (MI), General Services Administration, One Constitution Square, 1275 First Street NE., 642, Washington, DC 20417, 202 482-7340. You may also send comments to us by email at:

RISC@gsa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

Introduction to the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

I. What Are the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda?

II. Why Are the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda Published?

III. How Are the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda Organized?

IV. What Information Appears for Each Entry?

V. Abbreviations

VI. How Can Users Get Copies of the Plan and the Agenda?

Introduction to the Fall 2011 Regulatory Plan

AGENCY REGULATORY PLANS

Cabinet Departments

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Education

Department of Energy

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Homeland Security

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Department of the Interior

Department of Justice

Department of Labor

Department of Transportation

Department of the Treasury

Department of Veterans Affairs

Other Executive Agencies

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board

Environmental Protection Agency

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Financial Stability Oversight Council

General Services Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

National Archives and Records Administration

Office of Personnel Management

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

Small Business Administration

Social Security Administration

Independent Regulatory Agencies

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Federal Trade Commission

National Indian Gaming Commission

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

AGENCY AGENDAS

Cabinet Departments

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Education

Department of Energy

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Homeland Security

Department of the Interior

Department of Justice

Department of Labor

Department of Transportation

Department of the Treasury

Other Executive Agencies

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board

Environmental Protection Agency

General Services Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Small Business Administration

Joint Authority

Department of Defense/General Services Administration/National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Federal Acquisition Regulation)

Independent Regulatory Agencies

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Federal Communications Commission

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Federal Reserve System

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Securities and Exchange Commission

Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

I. What Is the Unified Agenda?

The Unified Agenda provides information about regulations that the Government is considering or reviewing. The Unified Agenda has appeared in the

Federal Register

twice each year since 1983 and has been available online since 1995. To further the objective of using modern technology to deliver better service to the American people for lower cost, beginning with the fall 2007 edition, the Internet is the basic means for conveying regulatory agenda information to the maximum extent legally permissible. The complete Unified Agenda is available to the public at

http://reginfo.gov.

The online Unified Agenda offers flexible search tools and will soon offer access to the entire historic Unified Agenda database.

The fall 2011 Unified Agenda publication appearing in the

Federal Register

entities and entries that have been selected for periodic review under section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Printed entries display only the fields required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Complete agenda information for those entries appears, in a uniform format, in the online Unified Agenda at

http://reginfo.gov.

These publication formats meet the publication mandates of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866, as well as move the Agenda process toward the goal of e-Government, at a substantially reduced printing cost compared with prior editions. The current format does not reduce the amount of information available to the public, but it does limit most of the content of the Agenda to online access. The complete online edition of the Unified Agenda includes regulatory agendas from 59 Federal agencies. Agencies of the United States Congress are not included.

The following agencies have no entries identified for inclusion in the printed regulatory flexibility agenda. An asterisk (*) indicates agencies that appear in

The Regulatory Plan.

The regulatory agendas of these agencies are available to the public at

http://reginfo.gov.

Department of Housing and Urban Development*

Department of State

Department of Veterans Affairs*

Agency for International Development

Commission on Civil Rights

Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled

Corporation for National and Community Service

Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission*

Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service

Financial Stability Oversight Council*

Institute of Museum and Library Services

National Archives and Records Administration*

National Endowment for the Humanities

National Science Foundation

Office of Government Ethics

Office of Management and Budget

Office of Personnel Management*

Peace Corps

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation*

Railroad Retirement Board

Selective Service System

Social Security Administration*

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Consumer Product Safety Commission*

Farm Credit Administration

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Federal Housing Finance Agency

Federal Maritime Commission

Federal Trade Commission*

National Credit Union Administration

National Indian Gaming Commission*

National Labor Relations Board

Postal Regulatory Commission

Surface Transportation Board

The Regulatory Information Service Center (the Center) compiles the Unified Agenda for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), part of the Office of Management and Budget. OIRA is responsible for overseeing the Federal Government's regulatory, paperwork, and information resource management activities, including implementation of Executive Order 12866. The Center also provides information about Federal regulatory activity to the President and his Executive Office, the Congress, agency managers, and the public.

The activities included in the Agenda are, in general, those that will have a regulatory action within the next 12 months. Agencies may choose to include activities that will have a longer timeframe than 12 months. Agency agendas also show actions or reviews completed or withdrawn since the last Unified Agenda. Executive Order 12866 does not require agencies to include regulations concerning military or foreign affairs functions or regulations related to agency organization, management, or personnel matters.

Agencies prepared entries for this publication to give the public notice of their plans to review, propose, and issue regulations. They have tried to predict their activities over the next 12 months as accurately as possible, but dates and schedules are subject to change. Agencies may withdraw some of the regulations now under development, and they may issue or propose other regulations not included in their agendas. Agency actions in the rulemaking process may occur before or after the dates they have listed. The Unified Agenda does not create a legal obligation on agencies to adhere to schedules in this publication or to confine their regulatory activities to those regulations that appear within it.

II. Why Is the Unified Agenda Published?

The Unified Agenda helps agencies comply with their obligations under the Regulatory Flexibility Act and various Executive orders and other statutes.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The

Regulatory Flexibility Act

requires agencies to identify those rules that may have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 602). Agencies meet that requirement by including the information in their submissions for the Unified Agenda. Agencies may also indicate those regulations that they are reviewing as part of their periodic review of existing rules under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 610). Executive Order 13272 entitled “Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,” signed August 13, 2002 (67 FR 53461), provides additional guidance on compliance with the Act.

Executive Order 12866

entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review,” signed September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51735), requires covered agencies to prepare an agenda of all regulations under development or review. The Order also requires that certain agencies prepare annually a regulatory plan of their “most important significant regulatory actions,” which appears as part of the fall Unified Agenda. Executive Order 13497, signed January 30, 2009 (74 FR 6113), revoked the amendments to Executive Order 12866 that were contained in Executive Order 13258 and Executive Order 13422.

Executive Order 13132

entitled “Federalism,” signed August 4, 1999 (64 FR 43255), directs agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have “federalism implications” as defined in the Order. Under the Order, an agency that is proposing a regulation with federalism implications, which either preempt State law or impose nonstatutory unfunded substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments, must consult with State and local officials early in the process of developing the regulation. In addition, the agency must provide to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a federalism summary impact statement for such a regulation, which consists of a description of the extent of the agency's prior consultation with State and local officials, a summary of their concerns and the agency's position supporting the need to issue the regulation, and a statement of the extent to which those concerns have been met. As part of this effort, agencies include in their submissions for the Unified Agenda information on whether their regulatory actions may have an effect on the various levels of government and whether those actions have federalism implications.

Executive Order 13563

Executive Order 13563 entitled “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,” signed January 18, 2011, supplements and reaffirms the

principles, structures, and definitions governing contemporary regulatory review that were established in Executive Order 12866, which includes the general principles of regulation and public participation, and orders integration and innovation in coordination across agencies; flexible approaches where relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory approaches; scientific integrity in any scientific or technological information and processes used to support the agencies' regulatory actions; and retrospective analysis of existing regulations.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

The

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(Pub. L. 104-4, title II) requires agencies to prepare written assessments of the costs and benefits of significant regulatory actions “that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more * * * in any 1 year * * *.” The requirement does not apply to independent regulatory agencies, nor does it apply to certain subject areas excluded by section 4 of the Act. Affected agencies identify in the Unified Agenda those regulatory actions they believe are subject to title II of the Act.

Executive Order 13211

entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,” signed May 18, 2001 (66 FR 28355), directs agencies to provide, to the extent possible, information regarding the adverse effects that agency actions may have on the supply, distribution, and use of energy. Under the Order, the agency must prepare and submit a Statement of Energy Effects to the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, for “those matters identified as significant energy actions.” As part of this effort, agencies may optionally include in their submissions for the Unified Agenda information on whether they have prepared or plan to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for their regulatory actions.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

The

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

(Pub. L. 104-121, title II) established a procedure for congressional review of rules (5 U.S.C. 801

et seq.

), which defers, unless exempted, the effective date of a “major” rule for at least 60 days from the publication of the final rule in the

Federal Register

. The Act specifies that a rule is “major” if it has resulted, or is likely to result, in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or meets other criteria specified in that Act. The Act provides that the Administrator of OIRA will make the final determination as to whether a rule is major.

III. How Is the Unified Agenda Organized?

Agency regulatory flexibility agendas are printed in a single daily edition of the

Federal Register

. A regulatory flexibility agenda is printed for each agency whose agenda includes entries for rules which are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities or rules that have been selected for periodic review under section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Each printed agenda appears as a separate part. The parts are organized alphabetically in four groups: Cabinet departments; other executive agencies; the Federal Acquisition Regulation, a joint authority; and independent regulatory agencies. Agencies may in turn be divided into subagencies. Each agency's part of the Agenda contains a preamble providing information specific to that agency. Each printed agency agenda has a table of contents listing the agency's printed entries that follow.

The online, complete Unified Agenda contains the preambles of all participating agencies. Unlike the printed edition, the online Agenda has no fixed ordering. In the online Agenda, users can select the particular agencies whose agendas they want to see. Users have broad flexibility to specify the characteristics of the entries of interest to them by choosing the desired responses to individual data fields. To see a listing of all of an agency's entries, a user can select the agency without specifying any particular characteristics of entries.

Each entry in the Agenda is associated with one of five rulemaking stages. The rulemaking stages are:

Prerule Stage

—actions agencies will undertake to determine whether or how to initiate rulemaking. Such actions occur prior to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) and may include Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRMs) and reviews of existing regulations.

Proposed Rule Stage

—actions for which agencies plan to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking as the next step in their rulemaking process or for which the closing date of the NPRM Comment Period is the next step.

Final Rule Stage

—actions for which agencies plan to publish a final rule or an interim final rule or to take other final action as the next step.

Long-Term Actions

—items under development but for which the agency does not expect to have a regulatory action within the 12 months after publication of this edition of the Unified Agenda. Some of the entries in this section may contain abbreviated information.

Completed Actions

—actions or reviews the agency has completed or withdrawn since publishing its last agenda. This section also includes items the agency began and completed between issues of the Agenda.

Long-Term Actions are rulemakings reported during the publication cycle that are outside of the required 12-month reporting period for which the Agenda was intended. Completed Actions in the publication cycle are rulemakings that are ending their lifecycle either by Withdrawal or completion of the rulemaking process. Therefore, the Long-Term and Completed RINs do not represent the ongoing, forward-looking nature intended for reporting developing rulemakings in the Agenda pursuant to Executive Order 12866, section 4(b) and 4(c). To further differentiate these two stages of rulemaking in the Unified Agenda from active rulemakings, Long-Term and Completed Actions are reported separately from active rulemakings, which can be any of the first three stages of rulemaking listed above. A separate search function is provided on

reginfo.gov

to search for Completed and Long-Term Actions apart from each other and active RINs.

A bullet (•) preceding the title of an entry indicates that the entry is appearing in the Unified Agenda for the first time.

In the printed edition, all entries are numbered sequentially from the beginning to the end of the publication. The sequence number preceding the title of each entry identifies the location of the entry in this edition. The sequence number is used as the reference in the printed table of contents. Sequence numbers are not used in the online Unified Agenda because the unique Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) is able to provide this cross-reference capability.

Editions of the Unified Agenda prior to fall 2007 contained several indexes, which identified entries with various characteristics. These included regulatory actions for which agencies believe that the Regulatory Flexibility Act may require a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, actions selected for periodic review under section 610(c) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and actions

that may have federalism implications as defined in Executive Order 13132 or other effects on levels of government. These indexes are no longer compiled, because users of the online Unified Agenda have the flexibility to search for entries with any combination of desired characteristics. The online edition retains the Unified Agenda's subject index based on the

Federal Register Thesaurus of Indexing Terms.

In addition, online users have the option of searching Agenda text fields for words or phrases.

IV. What Information Appears for Each Entry?

All entries in the online Unified Agenda contain uniform data elements including, at a minimum, the following information:

Title of the Regulation

—a brief description of the subject of the regulation. In the printed edition, the notation “Section 610 Review” following the title indicates that the agency has selected the rule for its periodic review of existing rules under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 610(c)). Some agencies have indicated completions of section 610 reviews or rulemaking actions resulting from completed section 610 reviews. In the online edition, these notations appear in a separate field.

Priority

—an indication of the significance of the regulation. Agencies assign each entry to one of the following five categories of significance.

(1) Economically Significant

As defined in Executive Order 12866, a rulemaking action that will have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or will adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities. The definition of an “economically significant” rule is similar but not identical to the definition of a “major” rule under 5 U.S.C. 801 (Pub. L. 104-121). (See below.)

(2) Other Significant

A rulemaking that is not Economically Significant but is considered Significant by the agency. This category includes rules that the agency anticipates will be reviewed under Executive Order 12866 or rules that are a priority of the agency head. These rules may or may not be included in the agency's regulatory plan.

(3) Substantive, Nonsignificant

A rulemaking that has substantive impacts but is neither Significant, nor Routine and Frequent, nor Informational/Administrative/Other.

(4) Routine and Frequent

A rulemaking that is a specific case of a multiple recurring application of a regulatory program in the Code of Federal Regulations and that does not alter the body of the regulation.

(5) Informational/Administrative/Other

A rulemaking that is primarily informational or pertains to agency matters not central to accomplishing the agency's regulatory mandate but that the agency places in the Unified Agenda to inform the public of the activity.

Major

—whether the rule is “major” under 5 U.S.C. 801 (Pub. L. 104-121) because it has resulted or is likely to result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or meets other criteria specified in that Act. The Act provides that the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs will make the final determination as to whether a rule is major.

Unfunded Mandates

—whether the rule is covered by section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). The Act requires that, before issuing an NPRM likely to result in a mandate that may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of more than $100 million in 1 year, agencies, other than independent regulatory agencies, shall prepare a written statement containing an assessment of the anticipated costs and benefits of the Federal mandate.

Legal Authority

—the section(s) of the United States Code (U.S.C.) or Public Law (Pub. L.) or the Executive order (E.O.) that authorize(s) the regulatory action. Agencies may provide popular name references to laws in addition to these citations.

CFR Citation

—the section(s) of the Code of Federal Regulations that will be affected by the action.

Legal Deadline

—whether the action is subject to a statutory or judicial deadline, the date of that deadline, and whether the deadline pertains to an NPRM, a Final Action, or some other action.

Abstract

—a brief description of the problem the regulation will address; the need for a Federal solution; to the extent available, alternatives that the agency is considering to address the problem; and potential costs and benefits of the action.

Timetable

—the dates and citations (if available) for all past steps and a projected date for at least the next step for the regulatory action. A date displayed in the form 12/00/11 means the agency is predicting the month and year the action will take place but not the day it will occur. In some instances, agencies may indicate what the next action will be, but the date of that action is “To Be Determined.” “Next Action Undetermined” indicates the agency does not know what action it will take next.

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required

—whether an analysis is required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.

) because the rulemaking action is likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined by the Act.

Small Entities Affected

—the types of small entities (businesses, governmental jurisdictions, or organizations) on which the rulemaking action is likely to have an impact as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Some agencies have chosen to indicate likely effects on small entities even though they believe that a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis will not be required.

Government Levels Affected

—whether the action is expected to affect levels of government and, if so, whether the governments are State, local, tribal, or Federal.

International Impacts

—whether the regulation is expected to have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise may be of interest to the Nation's international trading partners.

Federalism

—whether the action has “federalism implications” as defined in Executive Order 13132. This term refers to actions “that have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.” Independent regulatory agencies are not required to supply this information.

Included in the Regulatory Plan

—whether the rulemaking was included in the agency's current regulatory plan published in fall 2010.

Agency Contact

—the name and phone number of at least one person in the agency who is knowledgeable about the rulemaking action. The agency may also provide the title, address, fax number, email address, and TDD for each agency contact.

Some agencies have provided the following optional information:

RIN Information URL

—the Internet address of a site that provides more information about the entry.

Public Comment URL

—the Internet address of a site that will accept public comments on the entry. Alternatively, timely public comments may be submitted at the Governmentwide e-rulemaking site,

http://www.regulations.gov.

Additional Information

—any information an agency wishes to include that does not have a specific corresponding data element.

Compliance Cost to the Public

—the estimated gross compliance cost of the action.

Affected Sectors

—the industrial sectors that the action may most affect, either directly or indirectly. Affected sectors are identified by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes.

Energy Effects

—an indication of whether the agency has prepared or plans to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for the action, as required by Executive Order 13211 “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,” signed May 18, 2001 (66 FR 28355).

Related RINs

—one or more past or current RIN(s) associated with activity related to this action, such as merged RINs, split RINs, new activity for previously completed RINs, or duplicate RINs.

Some agencies that participated in the fall 2010 edition of The Regulatory Plan have chosen to include the following information for those entries that appeared in the Plan:

Statement of Need

—a description of the need for the regulatory action.

Summary of the Legal Basis

—a description of the legal basis for the action, including whether any aspect of the action is required by statute or court order.

Alternatives

—a description of the alternatives the agency has considered or will consider as required by section 4(c)(1)(B) of Executive Order 12866.

Anticipated Costs and Benefits

—a description of preliminary estimates of the anticipated costs and benefits of the action.

Risks

—a description of the magnitude of the risk the action addresses, the amount by which the agency expects the action to reduce this risk, and the relation of the risk and this risk reduction effort to other risks and risk reduction efforts within the agency's jurisdiction.

V. Abbreviations

The following abbreviations appear throughout this publication:

ANPRM

—An Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is a preliminary notice, published in the

Federal Register,

announcing that an agency is considering a regulatory action. An agency may issue an ANPRM before it develops a detailed proposed rule. An ANPRM describes the general area that may be subject to regulation and usually asks for public comment on the issues and options being discussed. An ANPRM is issued only when an agency believes it needs to gather more information before proceeding to a notice of proposed rulemaking.

CFR

—The Code of Federal Regulations is an annual codification of the general and permanent regulations published in the

Federal Register

by the agencies of the Federal Government. The Code is divided into 50 titles, each title covering a broad area subject to Federal regulation. The CFR is keyed to and kept up to date by the daily issues of the

Federal Register.

—An Executive order is a directive from the President to Executive agencies, issued under constitutional or statutory authority. Executive orders are published in the

Federal Register

and in title 3 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

—The

Federal Register

is a daily Federal Government publication that provides a uniform system for publishing Presidential documents, all proposed and final regulations, notices of meetings, and other official documents issued by Federal agencies.

—The Federal fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30.

NPRM

—A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is the document an agency issues and publishes in the

Federal Register

that describes and solicits public comments on a proposed regulatory action. Under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), an NPRM must include, at a minimum:

• A statement of the time, place, and nature of the public rulemaking proceeding;

• A reference to the legal authority under which the rule is proposed; and

• Either the terms or substance of the proposed rule or a description of the subjects and issues involved.

PL (or Pub. L.)

—A public law is a law passed by Congress and signed by the President or enacted over his veto. It has general applicability, unlike a private law that applies only to those persons or entities specifically designated. Public laws are numbered in sequence throughout the 2-year life of each Congress; for example, Pub. L. 112-4 is the fourth public law of the 112th Congress.

RFA

—A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is a description and analysis of the impact of a rule on small entities, including small businesses, small governmental jurisdictions, and certain small not-for-profit organizations. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.

) requires each agency to prepare an initial RFA for public comment when it is required to publish an NPRM and to make available a final RFA when the final rule is published, unless the agency head certifies that the rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

RIN

—The Regulation Identifier Number is assigned by the Regulatory Information Service Center to identify each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda, as directed by Executive Order 12866 (section 4(b)). Additionally, OMB has asked agencies to include RINs in the headings of their Rule and Proposed Rule documents when publishing them in the

Federal Register,

to make it easier for the public and agency officials to track the publication history of regulatory actions throughout their development.

Seq. No.

—The sequence number identifies the location of an entry in the printed edition of the Unified Agenda. Note that a specific regulatory action will have the same RIN throughout its development but will generally have different sequence numbers if it appears in different printed editions of the Unified Agenda. Sequence numbers are not used in the online Unified Agenda.

U.S.C.

—The United States Code is a consolidation and codification of all general and permanent laws of the United States. The U.S.C. is divided into 50 titles, each title covering a broad area of Federal law.

VI. How Can Users Get Copies of the Agenda?

Copies of the

Federal Register

issue containing the printed edition of the Unified Agenda (agency regulatory flexibility agendas) are available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954. Telephone: 202 512-1800 or 1 866 512-1800 (toll-free).

Copies of individual agency materials may be available directly from the agency or may be found on the agency's Web site. Please contact the particular agency for further information.

All editions of

The Regulatory Plan

and the

Unified Agenda of Federal

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

since fall 1995 are available in electronic form at

http://reginfo.gov,

along with flexible search tools.

In accordance with regulations for the

Federal Register,

the Government Printing Office's GPO FDsys Web site contains copies of the Agendas and Regulatory Plans that have been printed in the

Federal Register.

These documents are available at

http://www.fdsys.gov.

Dated: December 19, 2011.

John C. Thomas,

Director.

Introduction to the Fall 2011 Regulatory Plan

Executive Order 12866, issued in 1993, requires the annual production of a Unified Regulatory Agenda and Regulatory Plan. It does so to promote transparency—or in the words of the Executive Order itself, “to have an effective regulatory program, to provide for coordination of regulations, to maximize consultation and the resolution of potential conflicts at an early stage, to involve the public and its State, local, and tribal officials in regulatory planning, and to ensure that new or revised regulations promote the President's priorities and the principles set forth in this Executive order.”

The requirements of Executive Order 12866 were reaffirmed in Executive Order 13563, issued in 2011. Consistent with Executive Orders 13563 and 12866, we are now providing the Unified Regulatory Agenda and the Regulatory Plan for public scrutiny and review. Such scrutiny and review are closely connected with the general goal, central to Executive Order 13563, of promoting public participation in the rulemaking process.

It is important to understand that the Agenda and Plan are intended merely to serve as a preliminary statement, for public understanding and assessment, of regulatory and deregulatory policies and priorities that are now under contemplation. This preliminary statement often includes a number of rules that are not issued in the following year and that may well not be issued at all. This year, we have taken several new steps to clarify the purposes and uses of the Agenda and Plan and to improve its presentation. Among other things, we have narrowed the list of “active rulemakings” to rules that are not merely under some form of contemplation but that also have at least some possibility of issuance over the next year. We have also made it easier to understand which rules are active rulemakings rather than long-term actions or completed actions. But it remains true that rules on this list, designed among other things “to involve the public and its State, local, and tribal officials in regulatory planning,” must undergo serious internal and external scrutiny before they are issued—and that there are rules on the list that may never be issued.

In this light, it should be clear that this preliminary statement of policies and priorities has extremely important limitations. No regulatory action can be made effective until it has gone through legally required processes, including those that involve public scrutiny and review. For this reason, the inclusion of a regulatory action here does not necessarily mean that it will be finalized or even proposed. Any proposed or final action must satisfy the requirements of relevant statutes, Executive Orders, and Presidential Memoranda. Those requirements, public comments, and new information may or may not lead an agency to go forward with an action that is currently under contemplation and that is included here. For example, the directives of Executive Order 13563, emphasizing the importance of careful consideration of costs and benefits, may lead an agency to decline to proceed with a regulatory action that is presented here.

It is also important to note that under Executive Order 12866, whether a regulation counts as “economically significant” is not an adequate measure of whether it imposes high costs on the private sector. Economically significant actions may impose small costs or even no costs. For example, regulations may count as economically significant not because they impose significant costs, but because they confer large benefits. Moreover, many regulations count as economically significant not because they impose significant regulatory costs on the private sector, but because they involve transfer payments as required or authorized by law.

It should be observed that the number of economically significant actions listed as under active consideration here—138—is lower than the corresponding figure for Spring 2011 (149) and for Fall 2010 (140). It is notable that the number of such rules has not grown even taking account of rules implementing the Affordable Care Act and the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. We also note that the net benefits of regulation were unusually high in Fiscal Year 2011 (well over $50 billion for the year alone). In addition, the aggregate costs for that year (under $8 billion) were lower than in Fiscal Year 2010 and were not out of line with those in recent years, including during the Bush Administration.

With these notes and qualifications, the Regulatory Plan provides a list of important regulatory actions that are now under contemplation for issuance in proposed or final form during the upcoming fiscal year. In contrast, the Unified Agenda is a more inclusive list, including numerous ministerial actions and routine rulemakings, as well as long-term initiatives that agencies do not plan to complete in the coming year.

We hope that public scrutiny of the Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda might help ensure, in the words of Executive Order 13563, a regulatory system that protects “public health, welfare, safety, and our environment while promoting economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation.”

As discussed below, a large number of significant recent steps have been taken, consistent with Executive Order 13563, to reduce regulatory costs and ensure that our regulatory system is consistent with promoting growth and job creation. At the same time, a number of steps have been taken to promote public health, welfare, safety, and our environment. It is important to emphasize that the net benefits of recent rules, including the monetized benefits, are high—over the first two fiscal years of this Administration, in excess of $35 billion. Rules have been issued and initiatives have been undertaken that are saving lives on the highways and in workplaces; reducing air and water pollution, preventing thousands of deaths in the process; increasing fuel economy, thus saving money while reducing pollution; making both trains and planes safer; increasing energy efficiency, saving billions of dollars while increasing energy security; combating childhood obesity; and creating a “race to the top” in education. Consider, as merely one example, the fact that in 2010, the rates of roadway fatalities and injuries fell to their lowest recorded levels and to their lowest numbers since 1949. The decrease is attributable, in part, to a range of regulatory actions and to private-public partnerships that have increased safety.

Since President Reagan's Executive Order 12291, issued in 1981, a principal focus of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, and of regulatory policy in general, has been on maximizing net benefits. In this Administration, agencies and OMB have worked together to issue a number of rules for which the benefits exceed the costs, and by a large margin. Consider the following figure:

EP13FE12.000

These figures reflect the numbers for 2009 and 2010. As noted, the net benefits for 2011 are expected to be unusually high (in excess of $50 billion); they will be discussed in detail in the 2012 Report to Congress on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations.

The recent steps build on a great deal of new learning about regulation. As a result of conceptual and empirical advances, we know far more than during the New Deal and the Great Society. We have also learned much since the 1980s and 1990s. These lessons have informed the Administration's efforts to protect public health and safety while also promoting economic growth and job creation. Eight points are particularly important:

1. We are now equipped with state-of-the-art techniques for anticipating, cataloguing, and monetizing the consequences of regulation, including both benefits and costs.

2. We know that risks are part of systems, and that efforts to reduce a certain risk may increase other risks, perhaps even deadly ones, thus producing ancillary harms—and that efforts to reduce a certain risk may reduce other risks, perhaps even deadly ones, thus producing ancillary benefits.

3. We know that flexible, innovative approaches, maintaining freedom of choice and respecting heterogeneity and the fact that one size may not fit all, are often desirable, both because they preserve liberty and because they frequently cost less.

4. We know that large benefits can come from seemingly modest and small steps, including simplification of regulatory requirements, provision of information, and sensible default rules, such as automatic enrollment for retirement savings.

5. We know, more clearly than ever before, that it is important to allow public participation in the design of rules, because members of the public have valuable information about likely effects, existing problems, creative solutions, and possible unintended consequences.

6. We know that if carefully designed, disclosure policies can promote informed choices and save both money and lives.

7. We know that intuitions and anecdotes are unreliable, and that advance testing of the effects of rules, as through pilot programs or randomized controlled experiments, can be highly illuminating.

8. We know that it is important to explore the effects of regulation in the real world, to learn whether they are having beneficial consequences or producing unintended harm. We need to consult, and to learn from, those who are affected by rules.

Executive Order 13563 draws on these understandings and emphasizes the importance of protecting “public health, welfare, safety, and our environment while promoting economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation.” Executive Order 13563 explicitly points to the need for predictability and for certainty, and for use of the least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. It indicates that agencies “must take into account benefits and costs, both quantitative and qualitative.” It explicitly draws attention to the need to measure and to improve “the actual results of regulatory requirements”—a clear reference to the importance of retrospective evaluation.

Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions in Executive Order 12866, which has long governed regulatory review. In addition, it endorses, and quotes, a number of

provisions of that Executive Order that specifically emphasize the importance of considering costs—including the requirement that to the extent permitted by law, agencies should not proceed in the absence of a reasoned determination that the benefits justify the costs. Importantly, Executive Order 13563 directs agencies “to use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible.” This direction reflects a strong emphasis on quantitative analysis as a means of improving regulatory choices and increasing transparency.

Among other things, Executive Order 13563 sets out five sets of requirements to guide regulatory decision making:

•

Public participation.

Agencies are directed to promote public participation, in part by making supporting documents available on Regulations.gov in order to promote transparency and public comment. Executive Order 13563 also directs agencies, where feasible and appropriate, to engage the public, including affected stakeholders, before rulemaking is initiated.

•

Integration and innovation.

Agencies are directed to attempt to reduce “redundant, inconsistent, or overlapping” requirements, in part by working with one another to simplify and harmonize rules. This important provision is designed to reduce confusion, redundancy, and excessive cost. An important goal of simplification and harmonization is to promote rather than to hamper innovation, which is a foundation of both growth and job creation. Different offices within the same agency might work together to harmonize their rules; different agencies might work together to achieve the same objective. Such steps can also promote predictability and certainty.

•

Flexible approaches.

Agencies are directed to identify and consider flexible approaches to regulatory problems, including warnings, appropriate default rules, and disclosure requirements. Such approaches may “reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public.” In certain settings, they may be far preferable to mandates and bans, precisely because they maintain freedom of choice and reduce costs. The reference to “appropriate default rules” signals the possibility that important social goals can be obtained through simplification—as, for example, in the form of automatic enrollment, direct certification, or reduced paperwork burdens.

•

Science.

Agencies are directed to promote scientific integrity, and in a way that ensures a clear separation between judgments of science and judgments of policy.

•

Retrospective analysis of existing rules.

Agencies are directed to produce preliminary plans to engage in retrospective analysis of existing significant regulations to determine whether they should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed.

Executive Order 13563 addresses both the “flow” of new regulations that are under development and the “stock” of existing regulations that are already in place. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of promoting predictability, of carefully considering costs, of choosing the least burdensome approach, and of selecting the most flexible, least costly tools. In addition, Executive Order 13563 calls for careful reassessment, based on empirical analysis. It is understood that the prospective analysis required by Executive Order 13563 may depend on a degree of speculation and that the actual costs and benefits of a regulation may be lower or higher than what was anticipated when the rule was originally developed. It is also understood that circumstances may change in a way that requires reconsideration of regulatory requirements. After retrospective analysis has been undertaken, agencies will be in a position to reevaluate existing rules and to streamline, modify, or eliminate those that do not make sense in their current form.

In August 2011, over two dozen agencies released final plans to remove what the President has called unjustified rules and “absurd and unnecessary paperwork requirements that waste time and money.” Over the next five years, billions of dollars in savings are anticipated from just a few initiatives from the Department of Transportation, the Department of Labor, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Environmental Protection Agency. And all in all, the plans' initiatives will save tens of millions of hours in annual paperwork burdens on individuals, businesses, and state and local governments.

The plans span over 800 pages and offer more than 500 proposals. Some plans list well over 50 reforms. Many of the proposals focus on small business. Indeed, a number of the initiatives are specifically designed to reduce burdens on small business and to enable them to do what they do best, which is to create jobs. Some of the proposed initiatives represent a fundamental rethinking of how things have long been done—as, for example, with numerous efforts to move from paper to electronic reporting. For both private and public sectors, those efforts can save a great deal of money. Over the next five years, the Department of Treasury's paperless initiative will be saving $400 million and 12 million pounds of paper.

Many of the reforms will have a significant economic impact:

• The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has announced a final rule that will remove over 1.9 million annual hours of redundant reporting burdens on employers and save more than $40 million in annual costs. Businesses will no longer be saddled with the obligation to fill out unnecessary government forms, meaning that their employees will have more time to be productive and do their real work.

• To eliminate unjustified economic burdens on railroads, the Department of Transportation is reconsidering parts of a rule that requires railroads to install equipment on trains. DOT has proposed to refine the requirements so that the equipment is installed only where it is really needed on grounds of safety. DOT expects initial savings of up to $325 million, with total 20-year savings of up to $755 million.

• EPA has proposed to eliminate the obligation for many states to require air pollution vapor recovery systems at local gas stations, on the ground that modern vehicles already have effective air pollution control technologies. The anticipated annual savings are $87 million.

• The Departments of Commerce and State are undertaking a series of steps to eliminate unnecessary barriers to exports, including duplicative and unnecessary regulatory requirements, thus reducing the cumulative burden and uncertainty faced by American companies and their trading partners. These steps will make it a lot easier for American companies to reach new markets, increasing our exports while creating jobs here at home.

• To promote flexibility, the Department of Health and Human Services has proposed two rules, and finalized another, to reduce burdensome regulatory requirements now placed on hospitals and doctors. These reforms are expected to save more than $1 billion annually.

The regulatory lookback is not merely a one-time exercise. Regular reporting, about recent progress and coming initiatives, is required. The goal is to change the regulatory culture to ensure that rules on the books are reevaluated and are effective, cost-justified, and based on the best available science. By creating regulatory review teams at agencies, we will continue to examine what is working and what is not and to

eliminate unjustified and outdated regulations.

In addition to looking back at existing regulations, we are looking forward to ensure that future regulations are well-justified. Executive Order 13563 provides critical guidance with its emphasis on careful consideration of costs and benefits, public participation, integration and innovation, flexible approaches, and science. These requirements are meant to produce a regulatory system that draws on recent learning, that is driven by evidence, and that is suited to the distinctive circumstances of the twenty-first century.

Department of Agriculture

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

Wholesale Pork Reporting Program

0581-AD07

Proposed Rule Stage.

National Organic Program: Sunset Review for Nutrient Vitamins and Minerals (NOP-10-0083)

0581-AD17

Proposed Rule Stage.

Animal Welfare; Regulations and Standards for Birds

0579-AC02

Proposed Rule Stage.

Plant Pest Regulations; Update of General Provisions

0579-AC98

Proposed Rule Stage.

Importation of Live Dogs

0579-AD23

Final Rule Stage.

Animal Disease Traceability

0579-AD24

Final Rule Stage.

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Farm Bill of 2008 Retailer Sanctions

0584-AD88

Proposed Rule Stage.

National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs: Nutrition Standards for All Foods Sold in School, as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010

0584-AE09

Proposed Rule Stage.

WIC: Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) Implementation

0584-AE21

Proposed Rule Stage.

Nutrition Standards in the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs

0584-AD59

Final Rule Stage.

Direct Certification of Children in Food Stamp Households and Certification of Homeless, Migrant, and Runaway Children for Free Meals

0584-AD60

Final Rule Stage.

Eligibility, Certification, and Employment and Training Provisions of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008

0584-AD87

Final Rule Stage.

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant

0584-AE07

Final Rule Stage.

Prior Labeling Approval System: Generic Label Approval

0583-AC59

Proposed Rule Stage.

Product Labeling: Use of the Voluntary Claim “Natural” on the Labeling of Meat and Poultry Products

0583-AD30

Proposed Rule Stage.

New Poultry Slaughter Inspection

0583-AD32

Proposed Rule Stage.

Electronic Imported Product Inspection Application and Certification of Imported Product and Foreign Establishments; Amendments to Facilitate the Public Health Information System (PHIS)

0583-AD39

Proposed Rule Stage.

Electronic Export Application and Certification as a Reimbursable Service and Flexibility in the Requirements for Official Export Inspection Marks, Devices, and Certificates

0583-AD41

Proposed Rule Stage.

Performance Standards for the Production of Processed Meat and Poultry Products; Control of Listeria Monocytogenes in Ready-To-Eat Meat and Poultry Products

0583-AC46

Final Rule Stage.

Notification, Documentation, and Recordkeeping Requirements for Inspected Establishments

0583-AD34

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Commerce

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking

Stage

Revisions to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR): Control of Military Vehicles and Related Items That the President Determines do not Warrant Control on the United States Munitions List

0694-AF17

Final Rule Stage.

Fishery Management Plan for Regulating Offshore Marine Aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico

0648-AS65

Proposed Rule Stage.

Reducing Disturbances to Hawaiian Spinner Dolphins From Human Interactions

0648-AU02

Proposed Rule Stage.

Designation of Critical Habitat for the North Atlantic Right Whale

0648-AY54

Proposed Rule Stage.

Regulatory Amendments To Implement the Shark Conservation Act and Revise the Definition of Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing

0648-BA89

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Education

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as Amended

1840-AD05

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Energy

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

Energy Efficiency Standards for Battery Chargers and External Power Supplies

1904-AB57

Proposed Rule Stage.

Energy Conservation Standards for Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In Freezers

1904-AB86

Proposed Rule Stage.

Energy Efficiency Standards for Manufactured Housing

1904-AC11

Proposed Rule Stage.

Energy Conservation Standards for ER, BR, and Small Diameter Incandescent Reflector Lamps

1904-AC15

Proposed Rule Stage.

Energy Efficiency Standards for Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts

1904-AB50

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Health and Human Services

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

Health Information Technology: New and Revised Standards, Implementation Specifications, and Certification Criteria for Electronic Health Record Technology

0991-AB82

Proposed Rule Stage.

Electronic Submission of Data From Studies Evaluating Human Drugs and Biologics

0910-AC52

Proposed Rule Stage.

Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Benefit Preventive Controls for Food for Animals

0910-AG10

Proposed Rule Stage.

Unique Device Identification

0910-AG31

Proposed Rule Stage.

Produce Safety Regulation

0910-AG35

Proposed Rule Stage.

Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls

0910-AG36

Proposed Rule Stage.

Foreign Supplier Verification Program

0910-AG64

Proposed Rule Stage.

Accreditation of Third Parties to Conduct Food Safety Audits and for Other Related Purposes

0910-AG66

Proposed Rule Stage.

Infant Formula: Current Good Manufacturing Practices; Quality Control Procedures; Notification Requirements; Records and Reports; and Quality Factors

0910-AF27

Final Rule Stage.

Medical Device Reporting; Electronic Submission Requirements

0910-AF86

Final Rule Stage.

Electronic Registration and Listing for Devices

0910-AF88

Final Rule Stage.

Food Labeling: Nutrition Labeling for Food Sold in Vending Machines

0910-AG56

Final Rule Stage.

Food Labeling: Nutrition Labeling of Standard Menu Items in Restaurants and Similar Retail Food Establishments

0910-AG57

Final Rule Stage.

Medicare and Medicaid Programs: Reform of Hospital and Critical Access Hospital Conditions of Participation (CMS-3244-P)

0938-AQ89

Proposed Rule Stage.

Regulatory Provisions To Promote Program Efficiency, Transparency, and Burden Reduction (CMS-9070-P)

0938-AQ96

Proposed Rule Stage.

Proposed Changes to Hospital OPPS and CY 2013 Payment Rates; ASC Payment System and CY 2013 Payment Rates (CMS-1589-P)

0938-AR10

Proposed Rule Stage.

Revisions to Payment Policies Under the Physician Fee Schedule and Part B for CY 2013 (CMS-1590-P)

0938-AR11

Proposed Rule Stage.

Changes to the Hospital Inpatient an Long-Term Care Prospective Payment System for FY 2013 (CMS-1588-P)

0938-AR12

Proposed Rule Stage.

Medicaid Eligibility Expansion Under the Affordable Care Act of 2010 (CMS-2349-F)

0938-AQ62

Final Rule Stage.

Establishment of Exchanges and Qualified Health Plans Part I (CMS-9989-F)

0938-AQ67

Final Rule Stage.

State Requirements for Exchange—Reinsurance and Risk Adjustments (CMS-9975-F)

0938-AR07

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Homeland Security

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

Secure Handling of Ammonium Nitrate Program

1601-AA52

Proposed Rule Stage.

Asylum and Withholding Definitions

1615-AA41

Proposed Rule Stage.

New Classification for Victims of Criminal Activity; Eligibility for the U Nonimmigrant Status

1615-AA67

Proposed Rule Stage.

Exception to the Persecution Bar for Asylum, Refugee, and Temporary Protected Status, and Withholding of Removal

1615-AB89

Proposed Rule Stage.

Electronic Filing of Requests for Immigration Benefits; Requiring an Application To Change or Extend Nonimmigrant Status To Be Filed Electronically

1615-AB94

Proposed Rule Stage.

Immigration Benefits Business Transformation: Nonimmigrants; Student and Exchange Visitor Program

1615-AB95

Proposed Rule Stage.

Application of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to Unaccompanied Alien Children Seeking Asylum

1615-AB96

Proposed Rule Stage.

Administrative Appeals Office: Procedural Reforms To Improve Efficiency

1615-AB98

Proposed Rule Stage.

New Classification for Victims of Severe Forms of Trafficking in Persons; Eligibility for T Nonimmigrant Status

1615-AA59

Final Rule Stage.

Adjustment of Status to Lawful Permanent Resident for Aliens in T and U Nonimmigrant Status

1615-AA60

Final Rule Stage.

Application of Immigration Regulations to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

1615-AB77

Final Rule Stage.

Implementation of the 1995 Amendments to the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping (STCW) for Seafarers, 1978

1625-AA16

Final Rule Stage.

Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and Departure, and Automatic Identification System

1625-AA99

Final Rule Stage.

Nontank Vessel Response Plans and Other Vessel Response Plan Requirements

1625-AB27

Final Rule Stage.

Offshore Supply Vessels of At Least 6000 GT ITC

1625-AB62

Final Rule Stage.

Revision to Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Requirements for Mariners

1625-AB80

Final Rule Stage.

Importer Security Filing and Additional Carrier Requirements

1651-AA70

Final Rule Stage.

Changes to the Visa Waiver Program To Implement the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) Program

1651-AA72

Final Rule Stage.

Establishment of Global Entry Program

1651-AA73

Final Rule Stage.

Implementation of the Guam-CNMI Visa Waiver Program

1651-AA77

Final Rule Stage.

General Aviation Security and Other Aircraft Operator Security

1652-AA53

Proposed Rule Stage.

Freight Railroads, Public Transportation and Passenger Railroads, and Over-the-Road Buses—Security Training of Employees

1652-AA55

Proposed Rule Stage.

Freight Railroads and Passenger Railroads—Vulnerability Assessment and Security Plan

1652-AA56

Proposed Rule Stage.

Standardized Vetting, Adjudication, and Redress Services

1652-AA61

Proposed Rule Stage.

Aircraft Repair Station Security

1652-AA38

Final Rule Stage.

Continued Detention of Aliens Subject to Final Orders of Removal

1653-AA60

Proposed Rule Stage.

Continued Detention of Aliens Subject to Final Orders of Removal

1653-AA13

Final Rule Stage.

Extending Period for Optional Practical Training by 17 Months for F-1 Nonimmigrant Students With STEM Degrees and Expanding the CAP-GAP Relief for All F-1 Students With Pending H-1B Petitions

1653-AA56

Final Rule Stage.

Update of FEMA's Public Assistance Regulations

1660-AA51

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

Federal Housing Administration (FHA): Strengthening the Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECM) Program to Promote Sustained Homeownership (FR-5353)

2502-AI79

Proposed Rule Stage.

Supportive Housing for Persons With Disabilities Implementing New Project Rental Assistance Authority (FR-5576)

2502-AJ10

Proposed Rule Stage.

Tenant-Based Rental Assistance; Improving Performance Through a Strengthened Section 8 Management Assessment Program (FR-5201)

2577-AC76

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Justice

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape

1105-AB34

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Labor

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

Construction Contractors' Affirmative Action Requirements

1250-AA01

Proposed Rule Stage.

Persuader Agreements: Employer and Labor Relations Consultant Reporting Under the LMRDA

1245-AA03

Final Rule Stage.

Equal Employment Opportunity in Apprenticeship Amendment of Regulations

1205-AB59

Proposed Rule Stage.

Labor Certification Process and Enforcement for Temporary Employment in Occupations Other Than Agriculture or Registered Nursing in the United States (H-2B Workers)

1205-AB58

Final Rule Stage.

Definition of “Fiduciary”

1210-AB32

Proposed Rule Stage.

Respirable Crystalline Silica

1219-AB36

Proposed Rule Stage.

Criteria and Procedures for Proposed Assessment of Civil Penalties

1219-AB72

Proposed Rule Stage.

Proximity Detection Systems for Mobile Machines in Underground Mines

1219-AB78

Proposed Rule Stage.

Lowering Miners' Exposure to Coal Mine Dust, Including Continuous Personal Dust Monitors

1219-AB64

Final Rule Stage.

Proximity Detection Systems for Continuous Mining Machines in Underground Coal Mines

1219-AB65

Final Rule Stage.

Pattern of Violations

1219-AB73

Final Rule Stage.

Examination of Work Areas in Underground Coal Mines for Violations of Mandatory Health or Safety Standards

1219-AB75

Final Rule Stage.

Infectious Diseases

1218-AC46

Prerule Stage.

Injury and Illness Prevention Program

1218-AC48

Prerule Stage.

100

Occupational Exposure to Crystalline Silica

1218-AB70

Proposed Rule Stage.

101

Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses

1218-AC49

Proposed Rule Stage.

102

Hazard Communication

1218-AC20

Final Rule Stage.

Department of Transportation

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

103

Accessibility of Carrier Websites and Ticket Kiosks

2105-AD96

Proposed Rule Stage.

104

Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections III

2105-AE11

Proposed Rule Stage.

105

Carrier-Supplied Medical Oxygen, Accessible In-Flight Entertainment Systems, Service Animals, and Accessible Lavatories on Single-Aisle Aircraft

2105-AE12

Proposed Rule Stage.

106

Qualification, Service, and Use of Crewmembers and Aircraft Dispatchers

2120-AJ00

Proposed Rule Stage.

107

New York Congestion Management Rule for LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Newark Liberty International Airport

2120-AJ89

Proposed Rule Stage.

108

Air Ambulance and Commercial Helicopter Operations; Safety Initiatives and Miscellaneous Amendments

2120-AJ53

Final Rule Stage.

109

Safety Management Systems for Certificate Holders

2120-AJ86

Final Rule Stage.

110

Carrier Safety Fitness Determination

2126-AB11

Proposed Rule Stage.

111

National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners

2126-AA97

Final Rule Stage.

112

Passenger Car and Light Truck Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards MYs 2017 and Beyond

2127-AK79

Proposed Rule Stage.

113

Sound for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles

2127-AK93

Proposed Rule Stage.

114

Motorcoach Rollover Structural Integrity

2127-AK96

Proposed Rule Stage.

115

Electronic Stability Control Systems for Heavy Vehicles

2127-AK97

Proposed Rule Stage.

116

Require Installation of Seat Belts on Motorcoaches, FMVSS No. 208

2127-AK56

Final Rule Stage.

117

Major Capital Investment Projects (RRR)

2132-AB02

Proposed Rule Stage.

118

Regulations To Be Followed by All Departments, Agencies, and Shippers Having Responsibility To Provide a Preference for U.S.-Flag Vessels in the Shipment of Cargoes on Ocean Vessels

2133-AB74

Proposed Rule Stage.

Department of Veterans Affairs

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

119

VA Compensation and Pension Regulation Rewrite Project

2900-AO13

Proposed Rule Stage.

120

Caregivers Program

2900-AN94

Final Rule Stage.

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

121

Accessibility Standards for Medical Diagnostic Equipment

3014-AA40

Proposed Rule Stage.

Environmental Protection Agency

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

122

Risk and Technology Review for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Pulp and Paper Industry

2060-AQ41

Proposed Rule Stage.

123

Joint Rulemaking To Establish 2017 and Later Model Year Light Duty Vehicle GHG Emissions and CAFE Standards

2060-AQ54

Proposed Rule Stage.

124

Petroleum Refinery Sector Risk and Technology Review and NSPS

2060-AQ75

Proposed Rule Stage.

125

Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles: Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards

2060-AQ86

Proposed Rule Stage.

126

Greenhouse Gas New Source Performance Standard for Electric Generating Units for New Sources

2060-AQ91

Proposed Rule Stage.

127

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions: Group IV Polymers and Resins, Pesticide Active Ingredient Production, and Polyether Polyols Production Risk and Technology Review

2060-AR02

Proposed Rule Stage.

128

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters; Proposed Reconsideration

2060-AR13

Proposed Rule Stage.

129

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers; Reconsideration and Proposed Rule Amendments

2060-AR14

Proposed Rule Stage.

130

Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units; Reconsideration and Proposed Amendments

2060-AR15

Proposed Rule Stage.

131

NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule

2020-AA47

Proposed Rule Stage.

132

Pesticides; Certification of Pesticide Applicators

2070-AJ20

Proposed Rule Stage.

133

Pesticides; Agricultural Worker Protection Standard Revisions

2070-AJ22

Proposed Rule Stage.

134

Formaldehyde; Third-Party Certification Framework for the Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products

2070-AJ44

Proposed Rule Stage

135

Mercury; Regulation of Use in Certain Products

2070-AJ46

Proposed Rule Stage.

136

Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program for Public and Commercial Buildings

2070-AJ56

Proposed Rule Stage.

137

Revisions to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; Subpart J Product Schedule Listing Requirements

2050-AE87

Proposed Rule Stage.

138

Stormwater Regulations Revision To Address Discharges From Developed Sites

2040-AF13

Proposed Rule Stage.

139

Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category

2040-AF14

Proposed Rule Stage.

140

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) Reporting Rule

2040-AF22

Proposed Rule Stage.

141

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Application and Program Updates Rule

2040-AF25

Proposed Rule Stage.

142

Review of the Secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Oxides of Nitrogen and Oxides of Sulfur

2060-AO72

Final Rule Stage.

143

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units and Standards of Performance for Electric Utility Steam Generating Units

2060-AP52

Final Rule Stage.

144

Oil and Natural Gas Sector—New Source Performance Standards and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

2060-AP76

Final Rule Stage.

145

Criteria and Standards for Cooling Water Intake Structures

2040-AE95

Final Rule Stage.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

146

Disparate Impact and Reasonable Factors Other Than Age Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act

3046-AA76

Final Rule Stage.

National Archives and Records Administration

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

147

Federal Records Management; Electronic Records Archives (ERA)

3095-AB74

Proposed Rule Stage.

Small Business Administration

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

148

Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Policy Directive

3245-AF45

Proposed Rule Stage.

149

Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program Policy Directive

3245-AF84

Proposed Rule Stage.

150

Acquisition Process: Task and Delivery Order Contracts, Bundling, Consolidation

3245-AG20

Proposed Rule Stage.

151

Small Business Jobs Act: Small Business Mentor-Protégé Programs

3245-AG24

Proposed Rule Stage.

Social Security Administration

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

152

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Respiratory System Disorders (859P)

0960-AF58

Proposed Rule Stage.

153

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Hematological Disorders (974P)

0960-AF88

Proposed Rule Stage.

154

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Mental Disorders (886F)

0960-AF69

Final Rule Stage.

155

How We Collect and Consider Evidence of Disability (3487P)

0960-AG89

Final Rule Stage.

156

Amendments to Regulations Regarding Withdrawals of Applications and Voluntary Suspension of Benefits (3573F)

0960-AH07

Final Rule Stage.

157

Expedited Vocational Assessment Under the Sequential Evaluation Process (3684P)

0960-AH26

Final Rule Stage.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Sequence No.

Title

Regulation

Identifier No.

Rulemaking Stage

158

Medical Use of Byproduct Material—Amendments/Medical Event Definition [NRC-2008-0071]

3150-AI26

Proposed Rule Stage.

159

Fitness-For-Duty Programs [NRC-2009-0090]

3150-AI58

Proposed Rule Stage.

160

U.S. Evolutionary Power Reactor (EPR) Design Certification Amendment [NRC-2010-0132]

3150-AI82

Proposed Rule Stage.

161

Disposal of Unique Waste Streams [NRC-2011-0012]

3150-AI92

Proposed Rule Stage.

162

Revision of Fee Schedules: Fee Recovery for FY 2012 [NRC-2011-0207]

3150-AJ03

Proposed Rule Stage.

163

Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements [NRC-2004-0006]

3150-AH29

Final Rule Stage.

164

Physical Protection of Byproduct Material [NRC-2008-0120]

3150-AI12

Final Rule Stage.

165

Environmental Effect of Renewing the Operating License of a Nuclear Power Plant [NRC-2008-0608]

3150-AI42

Final Rule Stage.

166

AP1000 Design Certification Amendment [NRC-2010-0131]

3150-AI81

Final Rule Stage.

167

U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) Aircraft Impact Design Certification Amendment [NRC-2010-0134]

3150-AI84

Final Rule Stage.

168

Economic Simplified Boiling-Water Reactor (ESBWR) Design Certification [NRC-2010-0135]

3150-AI85

Final Rule Stage.

169

List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks—MAGNASTOR, Revision 2 [NRC-2011-0008]

3150-AI91

Final Rule Stage.

BILLING CODE 6820-27-P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA)

Statement of Regulatory Priorities

USDA's focus in 2012 will be on programs that create/save jobs, particularly in rural America, while identifying and taking action on those programs that could be modified, streamlined, and simplified, or reporting burdens reduced, particularly with the public's access to USDA programs. In addition, USDA's regulatory efforts in the coming year will be focused on achieving the Department's goals identified in the Department's Strategic Plan for 2010 to 2015.

• Assist rural communities to create prosperity so they are self-sustaining, re-populating, and economically thriving. USDA is the leading advocate for rural America. The Department supports rural communities and enhances quality of life for rural residents by improving their economic opportunities, community infrastructure, environmental health, and the sustainability of agricultural production. The common goal is to help create thriving rural communities with good jobs where people want to live and raise families, and where children have economic opportunities and a bright future.

• Ensure that all of America's children have access to safe, nutritious, and balanced meals. A plentiful supply of safe and nutritious food is essential to the well-being of every family and the healthy development of every child in America. USDA provides nutrition assistance to children and low-income people who need it and works to improve the healthy eating habits of all Americans, especially children. In addition, the Department safeguards the quality and wholesomeness of meat, poultry, and egg products and addresses and prevents loss and damage from pests and disease outbreaks.

• Ensure our national forests and private working lands are conserved, restored, and made more resilient to climate change, while enhancing our water resources. America's prosperity is inextricably linked to the health of our lands and natural resources. Forests, farms, ranches, and grasslands offer enormous environmental benefits as a source of clean air, clean and abundant water, and wildlife habitat. These lands generate economic value by supporting the vital agriculture and forestry sectors, attracting tourism and recreation visitors, sustaining green jobs, and producing ecosystem services, food, fiber, timber and non-timber products, and energy. They are also of immense social importance, enhancing rural quality of life, sustaining scenic and culturally important landscapes, and providing opportunities to engage in outdoor activity and reconnect with the land.

• Help America promote agricultural production and biotechnology exports as America works to increase food security. A productive agricultural sector is critical to increasing global food security. For many crops, a substantial portion of domestic production is bound for overseas markets. USDA helps American farmers and ranchers use efficient, sustainable production, biotechnology, and other emergent technologies to enhance food security around the world and find export markets for their products.

Important regulatory activities supporting the accomplishment of these goals in 2012 will include the following:

• Rural Development and Renewable Energy. USDA priority regulatory actions for the Rural Development mission will be to revise regulations for the Business and Industry Guaranteed Loan Program, Rural Development's flagship job creation and capital expansion business program, and finalize regulations for the bioenergy programs.

• USDA will continue to promote sustainable economic opportunities to create jobs in rural communities through the purchase and use of biobased products through the BioPreferred® program. USDA will continue to designate groups of biobased products to receive procurement preference from Federal agencies and contractors. BioPreferred has made serious efforts to minimize burdens on small business by providing a standard mechanism for product testing, an online application process, and individual assistance for small manufacturers when needed. Both the Federal preferred procurement and the certified label parts of the program are voluntary, and both are designed to assist biobased businesses in securing additional sales.

• Nutrition Assistance. As changes are made to the nutrition assistance programs, USDA will work to foster actions that ensure access to program benefits, improve program integrity, improve diets and healthy eating through nutrition education, and promote physical activity consistent with the national effort to reduce obesity. In support of these activities in 2012, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) plans to publish the final rule regarding the nutrition standards in the school meals programs; finalize a rule updating the WIC food packages; and establish permanent rules for the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program. FNS will continue to work to implement rules that minimize participant and vendor fraud in its nutrition assistance programs.

• Food Safety. In the area of food safety, USDA will continue to develop science-based regulations that improve the safety of meat, poultry, and processed egg products in the least burdensome and most cost-effective manner. Regulations will be revised to address emerging food safety challenges, streamlined to remove excessively prescriptive regulations, and updated to be made consistent with hazard analysis and critical control point principles. In 2012, the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) plans to propose regulations to establish new systems for poultry slaughter inspection, requirements for federally inspected egg product plants to develop and implement hazard analysis and critical control point systems and sanitation standard operating procedures, and finalize regulations on catfish inspection. To assist small entities to comply with food safety requirements, the FSIS will continue to collaborate with other USDA agencies and State partners in the enhanced small business outreach program.

• Farm Loans, Disaster Designation, and Environmental Compliance. USDA will work to ensure a strong U.S. agricultural system through farm income support and farm loan programs. In addition, USDA will streamline the disaster designation process and update and consolidate the environmental compliance regulations.

• Forestry and Conservation. In the conservation area, USDA plans to finalize regulations that would provide financial assistance grants to local governments, tribal governments, and nonprofit organizations to establish community forests by acquiring and protecting private forestlands.

• Marketing and Regulatory Programs. USDA will work to support the organic sector and continue regulatory work to protect the health and value of U.S. agricultural and natural resources. USDA will also implement regulations to enhance enforcement of the Packers and Stockyards Act. In addition, USDA plans to finalize acceptable animal disease traceability standards. Regarding plant health, USDA anticipates revising the permitting of movement of plant pests and biological control organisms. For the Animal Welfare Act, USDA will propose specific standards for the humane care of birds and finalize specific standards for the humane care of dogs imported for resale.

Retrospective Review and Executive Order 13563

In January 2011, President Obama issued Executive Order (E.O.) 13563 on Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. As part of this E.O., agencies were asked to review existing rules that may be outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal them accordingly. Reducing the regulatory burden on the American people and our trading partners is a priority for USDA, and we will continually work to improve the effectiveness of our existing regulations. As a result of our regulatory review efforts in 2011, USDA will make regulatory changes in 2012, including the following:

Labeling—Generic Approval and Regulations Consolidation.

FSIS is developing a rule that will expand the circumstances in which the labels of meat and poultry products will be deemed to be generically approved by FSIS. The rule will reduce duplication and streamline the regulations on this subject by combining them into a single part of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR);

Electronic Export Application and Certification Fee.

FSIS is planning a rule to provide for the electronic transmittal of foreign establishment certifications between FSIS and foreign governments. The rule will consolidate four inspection certificates (meat, meat by-products, poultry, and egg products) into one certificate. The rulemaking is intended, in part, to accommodate the Agency's electronic Public Health Information System.

Environmental Compliance.

The Farm Service Agency (FSA) will consolidate and update the environmental compliance regulations to ensure regulations are consistent and current for all FSA programs and remove obsolete regulations;

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Streamlining.

The Natural Resources and Environment mission area and the Forest Service (FS), in cooperation with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), is considering a series of initiatives to improve and streamline the NEPA process as it applies to FS projects;

Rural Energy for America Program.

This new program will modify the existing grant and guaranteed loan program for renewable energy system (RES) and energy efficiency improvement (EEI) projects. In addition, it would add a grant program for RES feasibility studies and a grant program for energy audits and renewable energy development assistance. This rulemaking will streamline the process for smaller grants, lessening the burden to the customer. It will also make the guaranteed portion of the rule consistent with other programs Rural Development (RD) manages and allow applications to be accepted year around;

Business and Industry Loan Guaranteed Program.

RD plans to rewrite the regulations, which will result in improved efficiency and effectiveness of the program, fewer errors because the guidelines and requirements will be clearer, and items will be more easily found in a better organized volume of regulations; and

Water and Waste Loans and Grants.

RD will update the operations aspects of

the loan and grant program to reduce the burden on the borrower.

Reducing the Paperwork Burden on Customers and Executive Order 13563

USDA has continued to make substantial progress in realizing the goal of the Paperwork Reduction Act. For example, the Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services (FFAS) mission area will reduce the paperwork burden on program participants by consolidating the information collections required to participate in farm programs administered by FSA and the Federal crop insurance program administered by the Risk Management Agency (RMA).

FFAS will evaluate methods to simplify and standardize, to the extent practical, acreage reporting processes, program dates, and data definitions across the various USDA programs and agencies. FFAS expects to allow producers to use information from their farm-management and precision agriculture systems for reporting production, planted and harvested acreage, and other key information needed to participate in USDA programs. FFAS will also streamline the collection of producer information by FSA and RMA with the agricultural production information collected by National Agricultural Statistics Service.

These process changes will allow for program data that is common across agencies to be collected once and utilized or redistributed to Agency programs in which the producer chooses to participate. FFAS plans to implement the Acreage and Crop Reporting Streamlining Initiative (ACRSI) in an incremental approach starting in late 2012 with a pilot in Kansas for growers of winter wheat when OMB approves the information collection. Full implementation is planned for 2013. When specific changes are identified, FSA and RMA will make any required conforming changes in their respective regulations.

Increasingly, USDA is providing electronic alternatives to its traditionally paper-based customer transactions. As a result, customers increasingly have the option to electronically file forms and other documentation online, allowing them to choose when and where to conduct business with USDA.

For example, Rural Development continues to review its regulations to determine which application procedures for Business Programs, Community Facilities Programs, Energy Programs, and Water and Environmental Programs can be streamlined and its requirements synchronized. RD is approaching the exercise from the perspective of the people it serves, by communicating with stakeholders on two common areas of regulation that can provide the basis of reform.

The first area provides support for entrepreneurship and business innovation. This initiative would provide for the streamlining and reformulating of the Business & Industry Loan Guarantee Program and the Intermediary Relending Program—the first such overhauls in over 20 years. The second area would provide for streamlining programs being made available to municipalities, tribes, and non-profit organizations; specifically Water and Waste Disposal, Community Facilities, and Rural Business Enterprise Grants, plus programs such as Electric and Telecommunications loans that provide basic community needs. This regulatory reform initiative has the potential to significantly reduce the burden to respondents (lenders and borrowers).

To the extent practicable, each reform initiative will consist of a common application and uniform documentation requirements making it easier for constituency groups to apply for multiple programs. In addition, there will be associated regulations for each program that will contain program specific information.

Natural Resources Conservation Service will also improve the delivery of technical and financial assistance by simplifying customer access to NRCS' technical and financial assistance programs, streamlining the delivery and timeliness of conservation assistance to clients, and enhancing the technical quality of its conservation planning and services. The streamlining initiatives will allow NRCS field staff to spend more time on conservation planning in the field with customers, reduce the time needed to implement cost-share contracts, and provide more flexibility for customers to work with NRCS in different ways. NRCS estimates that this initiative has the potential to reduce the amount of time required for producers to participate in USDA's conservation programs by almost 800,000 hours annually. This includes efficiencies from reduced paperwork, data entry by the client, and reduced travel time to and from the local office to complete forms and other administrative tasks. Improvements being considered include the following:

• Providing an online portal that will allow customers to apply for programs or services, review their plans and contracts, view and assess natural resource information specifically about their farm, evaluate the costs and benefits for various conservation treatment alternatives, notify NRCS of installed practices, and check on contract payments at their convenience;

• Creating an e-customer profile that will improve customer service by allowing the client to view, finalize, and electronically sign documents using remote electronic signature, on-site rather than at a local office;

• Providing clients with more timely and specific information on alternative conservation treatments, including the environmental benefits of their planned and applied practices;

• Accelerating payments to clients; and

• Simplifying conservation plan documents to more specifically address client needs and goals.

Major Regulatory Priorities

This document represents summary information on prospective significant regulations as called for in E.O.s 12866 and 13563. The following USDA agencies are represented in this regulatory plan, along with a summary of their mission and key regulatory priorities in 2012:

Food and Nutrition Service

Mission: FNS increases food security and reduces hunger in partnership with cooperating organizations by providing children and low-income people access to food, a healthful diet, and nutrition education in a manner that supports American agriculture and inspires public confidence.

Priorities: In addition to responding to provisions of legislation authorizing and modifying Federal nutrition assistance programs, FNS' 2012 regulatory plan supports USDA's Strategic Goal “Ensure that all of America's children have access to safe, nutritious, and balanced meals,” and its two related objectives:

Access to Nutritious Food. This objective represents FNS's efforts to improve nutrition by providing access to program benefits (food consumed at home, school meals, commodities) and distributing State administrative funds to support program operations. To advance this objective, FNS plans to publish a final rule of the 2008 Farm Bill that ensures access to SNAP benefits and addresses other eligibility, certification, employment, and training issues. An interim rule, implementing provisions of the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004 to establish automatic eligibility for homeless children for school meals, further supports this objective.

Promote Healthy Diet and Physical Activity Behaviors. This objective represents FNS' efforts to improve the

diets of its clients through nutrition education, support the national effort to reduce obesity by promoting healthy eating and physical activity, and to ensure that program benefits meet appropriate standards to effectively improve nutrition for program participants. In support of this objective, FNS plans to publish the final rule regarding the nutrition standards in the school meals programs, finalize a rule updating the WIC food packages, and establish permanent rules for the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, which currently operates in a select number of schools in each State, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

Food Safety and Inspection Service

Mission: FSIS is responsible for ensuring that meat, poultry, egg, and catfish products in interstate and foreign commerce are wholesome, not adulterated, and properly marked, labeled, and packaged.

Priorities: FSIS is committed to developing and issuing science-based regulations intended to ensure that meat, poultry, egg, and catfish products are wholesome and not adulterated or misbranded. FSIS regulatory actions support the objective to protect public health by ensuring that food is safe under USDA's goal to ensure access to safe food. To reduce the number of foodborne illnesses and increase program efficiencies, FSIS will continue to review its existing authorities and regulations to ensure that it can address emerging food safety challenges, to streamline excessively prescriptive regulations, and to revise or remove regulations that are inconsistent with the FSIS' hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) regulations. FSIS is also working with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to improve coordination and increase the effectiveness of inspection activities. FSIS' priority initiatives are as follows:

➢ Rulemakings that support initiatives of the President's Food Safety Working Group:

• Poultry Slaughter Inspection. Based on the Administration's top-to-bottom review of food safety activities, the Food Safety and Inspection Service will issue regulations that will prevent thousands of food-borne illnesses by more clearly focusing FSIS inspection activities on improving food safety, streamline poultry inspections, and reduce Government spending.

• Revision of Egg Products Inspection Regulations. FSIS is planning to propose requirements for federally inspected egg product plants to develop and implement HACCP systems and sanitation standard operating procedures. FSIS will be proposing pathogen reduction performance standards for egg products and will remove prescriptive requirements for egg product plants.

➢ Initiatives that provide for disclosure or that enable economic growth. FSIS plans to issue two rules to promote disclosure of information to the public or that provide flexibility for the adoption of new technologies:

• Product Labeling; Use of the Voluntary Claim “Natural” in the Labeling of Meat and Poultry Products. FSIS will propose to amend the meat and poultry products regulations to define the conditions under which the voluntary claim “natural” may be used on meat and poultry product labeling.

• Food Ingredients and Sources of Radiation Listed and Approved for Use in the Production of Meat and Poultry Products. FSIS will propose to amend its food ingredient regulations to provide for the use under certain conditions of benzoic acid, sodium propionate, or sodium benzoate.

Notification, Documentation, and Recordkeeping Requirements for Inspected Establishments. As authorized by the 2008 Farm Bill, FSIS will issue final regulations that will require establishments that are subject to inspection to promptly notify FSIS when an adulterated or misbranded product received by or originating from the establishment has entered into commerce. The regulations also will require the establishments to prepare and maintain current procedures for the recall of all products produced and shipped by the establishments and to document each reassessment of the establishments' process control plans.

Catfish Inspection. FSIS is developing final regulations to implement provisions of the 2008 Farm Bill provisions that make catfish an amenable species under the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA).

Public Health Information System. To support its food safety inspection activities, FSIS is implementing the Public Health Information System (PHIS). PHIS, which is user-friendly and Web-based, will replace many of FSIS' current systems and automate many business processes. PHIS also will improve FSIS' ability to systematically verify the effectiveness of foreign food safety systems and enable greater exchange of information between FSIS and other Federal agencies (such as U.S. Customs and Border Protection) involved in tracking cross-border movement of import and export shipments of meat, poultry, and processed egg products. To facilitate the implementation of some PHIS components, FSIS is proposing to provide for electronic export and import application and certification processes as alternatives to the current paper-based systems for these certifications.

Other Planned Initiatives. FSIS plans to finalize a February 2001 proposed rule to establish food safety performance standards for all processed ready-to-eat (RTE) meat and poultry products and for partially heat-treated meat and poultry products that are not ready-to-eat. Some provisions of the proposal addressed post-lethality contamination of RTE products with Listeria monocytogenes. In June 2003, FSIS published an interim final rule requiring establishments to prevent L. monocytogenes contamination of RTE products. FSIS has carefully reviewed its economic analysis of the interim final rule and is planning to affirm the interim rule as a final rule with changes.

FSIS Small Business Implications. The great majority of businesses regulated by FSIS are small businesses. Some of the regulations listed above substantially affect small businesses. FSIS conducts a small business outreach program that provides critical training, access to food safety experts, and information resources (such as compliance guidance and questions and answers on various topics) in forms that are uniform, easily comprehended, and consistent. FSIS collaborates in this effort with other USDA agencies and cooperating State partners. For example, FSIS makes plant owners and operators aware of loan programs, available through USDA's Rural Business and Cooperative programs, to help them in upgrading their facilities. FSIS employees meet with small and very small plant operators to learn more about their specific needs and provide joint training sessions for small and very small plants and FSIS employees.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Mission: A major part of the mission of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is to protect the health and value of American agricultural and natural resources. APHIS conducts programs to prevent the introduction of exotic pests and diseases into the U.S. and conducts surveillance, monitoring, control, and eradication programs for pests and diseases in this country. These activities enhance agricultural productivity and competitiveness and contribute to the national economy and the public health. APHIS also conducts programs to ensure the humane handling, care,

treatment, and transportation of animals under the Animal Welfare Act.

Priorities: With respect to animal health, APHIS is continuing work to revise its regulations concerning bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) to provide a more comprehensive and universally applicable framework for the importation of certain animals and products. In the area of plant health, APHIS is in the midst of a revision to its regulations for the importation and interstate movement of plant pests and biological control organisms to clarify the factors that would be considered when assessing the risks associated with the movement of certain organisms, facilitate the movement of regulated organisms and articles in a manner that also protects U.S. agriculture, and address gaps in the current regulations. APHIS also plans to propose standards for the humane handling, care, treatment, and transportation of birds covered under the Animal Welfare Act.

Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at

http://www.aphis.usda.gov.

Agricultural Marketing Service

Mission: The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) provides marketing services to producers, manufacturers, distributors, importers, exporters, and consumers of food products. The AMS also manages the Government's food purchases, supervises food quality grading, maintains food quality standards, and supervises the Federal research and promotion programs.

Priorities: AMS' priority items for the next year include rulemaking that impact the organic industry, as well as the wholesale pork industry. Rulemakings the Agency intends to initiate within the next 12 months include:

Sunset Review (2012)—Nutrient Vitamins and Minerals. On March 26, 2010, the National Organic Program (NOP) issued an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) announcing the National Organic Standards Board's (NOSB) sunset review of exempted and prohibited substances codified at the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances of the NOP regulations. This review included a listing for “Nutrient vitamins and minerals” scheduled to sunset on October 21, 2012. AMS intends to publish a proposed rule to address a recommendation submitted by the NOSB for this listing. This proposed rule would continue the exemption (use) for nutrient vitamins and minerals for 5 years after the October 21, 2012, sunset date. This proposed rule would amend the annotation for nutrient vitamins and minerals to correct an inaccurate cross reference to U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations as AMS determined that the current exemption for the use of nutrient vitamins and minerals in organic products in the NOP regulations is inaccurate. In effect, the proposed amendment would clarify what synthetic substances are allowed as nutrient vitamins and minerals in organic products. Further, the NOP regulations do not correctly provide for the fortification of infant formula that would meet FDA requirements. This proposed rule would incorporate the correct FDA citation with respect to the addition of required vitamins and minerals to organic infant formula.

Livestock Mandatory Reporting; Establishing Regulations for Wholesale Pork. As directed by the 2008 Farm Bill, the Secretary conducted a study to determine advantages, drawbacks, and potential implementation issues associated with adopting mandatory wholesale pork reporting. The report from this study concluded that negotiated wholesale pork price reporting is thin and becoming thinner and found some degree of support for moving to mandatory price reporting exists at every segment of the industry interviewed. That study also concluded that the benefits likely would exceed the cost of moving from a voluntary to a mandatory reporting program for wholesale pork.

Subsequently, the Mandatory Price Reporting Act of 2010 (2010 Reauthorization Act) (Pub. L. 111-239), was signed into law on September 28, 2010, and reauthorized Livestock Mandatory Reporting for 5 years and added a provision for mandatory reporting of wholesale pork cuts. The 2010 Reauthorization Act directed the Secretary to engage in negotiated rulemaking to make required regulatory changes for mandatory wholesale pork reporting.

Further, the 2010 Reauthorization Act directed the Secretary to establish a Committee that represented the spectrum of interests within the pork industry, as well as related stakeholders, to ensure all parties had input into the regulatory framework. Specifically, the statute required that the Committee include representatives from (i) organizations representing swine producers; (ii) organizations representing packers of pork, processors of pork, retailers of pork, and buyers of wholesale pork; (iii) Department of Agriculture; and (iv) interested parties that participate in swine or pork production.

The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) convened the Wholesale Pork Reporting Negotiated Rulemaking Committee (Committee) through notice in the

Federal Register

on January 26, 2011. The Committee met three times over the period February through May of 2011 to develop the regulatory framework necessary to implement a mandatory program of wholesale pork reporting.

The regulatory text developed by the Committee will serve as the primary basis for the proposed rule, consistent with both the intent of Congress and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act. It is important to note that the Committee reached consensus on all items included in the proposed rule—where consensus was defined by the Committee bylaws as being unanimous agreement. Therefore, AMS is confident the proposed rule to implement wholesale pork reporting will be met with little or no resistance from the industry members who will be required to report under the mandatory system.

Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Administration

Mission: The Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) facilitates the marketing of livestock, poultry, meat, cereals, oilseeds, and related agricultural products and promotes fair and competitive trading practices for the overall benefit of consumers and American agriculture. GIPSA's activities contribute significantly to USDA's goal to increase prosperity in rural areas by supporting a competitive agricultural system.

Priorities: GIPSA intends to issue a final rule that will define practices or conduct that are unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive, and/or that represent the making or giving of an undue or unreasonable preference or advantage, and ensure that producers and growers can fully participate in any arbitration process that may arise relating to livestock or poultry contracts. This regulation is being finalized in accordance with the authority granted to the Secretary by the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 and with the requirements of sections 11005 and 11006 of the 2008 Farm Bill.

Farm Service Agency

Mission: FSA's mission is to equitably serve all farmers, ranchers, and agricultural partners through the delivery of effective, efficient agricultural programs, which contributes to two USDA goals: Assist rural communities in creating prosperity so they are self-sustaining, re-

populating, and economically thriving; and enhance the Nation's natural resource base by assisting owners and operators of farms and ranches to conserve and enhance soil, water, and related natural resources. FSA supports the first goal by stabilizing farm income, providing credit to new or existing farmers and ranchers who are temporarily unable to obtain credit from commercial sources, and helping farm operations recover from the effects of disaster. FSA supports the second goal by administering several conservation programs directed toward agricultural producers. The largest program is the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), which protects nearly 32 million acres of environmentally sensitive land.

Priorities: Farm Loan Programs. FSA will develop and issue regulations to amend programs for farm operating loans, down payment loans, and emergency loans to include socially disadvantaged farmers, increase loan limits, loan size, funding targets, interest rates, and graduating borrowers to commercial credit. In addition, FSA will further streamline normal loan servicing activities and reduce burden on borrowers while still protecting the loan security.

Disaster Designation. FSA will revise the disaster designation process to streamline it and reduce the burden on States and tribes requesting disaster designations. One result may be fewer delays in delivering disaster assistance to help farm operations recover from the effects of disaster.

Forest Service

Mission: The mission of the Forest Service is to sustain the health, productivity, and diversity of the Nation's forests and rangelands to meet the needs of present and future generations. This includes protecting and managing National Forest System lands, providing technical and financial assistance to States, communities, and private forest landowners, and developing and providing scientific and technical assistance and scientific exchanges in support of international forest and range conservation. FS' regulatory priorities support the accomplishment of USDA's goal to ensure our national forests are conserved, restored, and made more resilient to climate change, while enhancing our water resources.

Priorities: Special Areas; State-Specific Inventoried Roadless Area Management: Colorado. FS planned final rulemaking would establish a State-specific rule to provide management direction for conserving and managing inventoried roadless areas on National Forest System lands in the State of Colorado.

Land Management Planning Rule. FS is required to issue rulemaking for National Forest System land management planning under 16 U.S.C. 1604. The first planning rule was adopted in 1979, and amended in 1982. FS published a new planning rule on April 21, 2008 (73 FR 21468). On June 30, 2009, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California invalidated FS' 2008 Planning Rule published at 36 CFR 219 based on violations of NEPA and the Endangered Species Act in the rulemaking process. The District Court vacated the 2008 rule, enjoined USDA from further implementing it, and remanded it to USDA for further proceedings. USDA has determined that the 2000 planning rule is now in effect, including its transition provisions as amended in 2002 and 2003, and as clarified by interpretative rules issued in 2001 and 2004, which allows the use of the provisions of the 1982 planning rule to amend or revise plans. FS is now in the 2000 planning rule transition period. FS published a proposed planning rule on February 14, 2011 (76 FR 8480). The final rule is expected to be published December 2011. In so doing, FS plans to correct deficiencies that have been identified over two decades of forest planning and update planning procedures to reflect contemporary collaborative planning practices.

Community Forest and Open Space Conservation Program. The purpose of the Community Forest Program is to achieve community benefits through financial assistance grants to local governments, tribal governments, and nonprofit organizations to establish community forests by acquiring and protecting private forestlands. Community forest benefits are specified in the authorizing statute and include economic benefits from sustainable forest management, natural resource conservation, forest-based educational programs, model forest stewardship activities, and recreational opportunities.

Rural Business-Cooperative Service

Mission: Promoting a dynamic business environment in rural America is the goal of the Rural Business-Cooperative Service (RBS). Business Programs works in partnership with the private sector and the community-based organizations to provide financial assistance and business planning, and helps fund projects that create or preserve quality jobs and/or promote a clean rural environment. The financial resources are often leveraged with those of other public and private credit source lenders to meet business and credit needs in under-served areas. Recipients of these programs may include individuals, corporations, partnerships, cooperatives, public bodies, nonprofit corporations, Indian tribes, and private companies. The mission of Cooperative Programs of RBS is to promote understanding and use of the cooperative form of business as a viable organizational option for marketing and distributing agricultural products.

Priorities: In support USDA's goal to increase the prosperity of rural communities, RBS regulatory priorities will facilitate sustainable renewable energy development and enhance the opportunities necessary for rural families to thrive economically. RBS' priority will be to publish regulations to fully implement the 2008 Farm Bill. This includes promulgating regulations for the Biorefinery Assistance Program (sec. 9003), the Repowering Assistance Program (sec. 9004), the Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels (sec. 9005), and the Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP). RBS has been administering sections 9003, 9004, and 9005 through the use of Notices of Funds Availability and Notices of Contract Proposals. Revisions to the Rural Energy for America Program (sec. 9007) will be made to incorporate Energy Audits and Renewable Energy Development Assistance and Feasibility Studies for Rural Energy Systems as eligible grant purposes, as well as other Farm Bill initiatives and various technical changes throughout the rule. In addition, revisions to the Business and Industry Guaranteed Loan Program will be made to implement 2008 Farm Bill provisions and other program initiatives. These rules will minimize program complexity and burden on the public while enhancing program delivery and RBS oversight.

Rural Utilities Service

Mission: The mission of the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) is to improve the quality of life in rural America by providing investment capital for the deployment of critical rural utilities telecommunications, electric, and water and waste disposal infrastructure. Financial assistance is provided to rural utilities, municipalities, commercial corporations, limited liability companies, public utility districts, Indian tribes, and cooperative, non-profit, limited-dividend, or mutual associations. The public-private partnership, which is forged between RUS and these industries, results in billions of dollars in rural infrastructure

development and creates thousands of jobs for the American economy.

Priorities: RUS' regulatory priorities will be to achieve the President's goal to bring affordable broadband to all rural Americans. To accomplish this, RUS will continue to improve the Broadband Program established by the 2002 Farm Bill. The 2002 Farm Bill authorized RUS to approve loans and loan guarantees for the costs of construction, improvement, and acquisition of facilities and equipment for broadband service in eligible rural communities. The 2008 Farm Bill significantly changed the statutory requirements of the Broadband Loan Program. As such, RUS issued an interim rule to implement the statutory changes and requested comments on the section of the rule that was not part of the proposed rule published in May 2007. Comments were received and the agency will analyze the comments and finalize the rule.

Departmental Management

Mission: Departmental Management's mission is to provide management leadership to ensure that USDA administrative programs, policies, advice, and counsel meet the needs of USDA program organizations, consistent with laws and mandates, and provide safe and efficient facilities and services to customers.

Priorities: In support of the Department's goal to increase rural prosperity, USDA's departmental management will finalize regulations to revise the BioPreferred program guidelines to continue adding designated product categories to the preferred procurement program, including intermediates and feedstocks and finished products made of intermediates and feedstocks.

Aggregate Costs and Benefits

USDA will ensure that its regulations provide benefits that exceed costs but is unable to provide an estimate of the aggregated impacts of its regulations. Problems with aggregation arise due to differing baselines, data gaps, and inconsistencies in methodology and the type of regulatory costs and benefits considered. Some benefits and costs associated with rules listed in the regulatory plan cannot currently be quantified as the rules are still being formulated. For 2012, USDA's focus will be to implement the changes to programs in such a way as to provide benefits while minimizing program complexity and regulatory burden for program participants.

USDA—Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)

Proposed Rule Stage

1. Wholesale Pork Reporting Program

Priority:

Other Significant.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 1635 to 1636

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 59.

Legal Deadline:

Final, Statutory, March 28, 2012.

With the passage of S. 3656, the Mandatory Price Reporting Act of 2010, the Secretary of Agriculture is required to amend chapter 3 of subtitle B of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 by adding a new section for mandatory reporting of wholesale pork cuts. To make these amendments, the Secretary was directed to promulgate a final rule no later than 1

1/2

years after the date of the enactment of the Act. Accordingly, a final rule will be promulgated by March 28, 2012.

Abstract:

On September 15, 2010, Congress passed the Mandatory Price Reporting Act of 2010 reauthorizing Livestock Mandatory Reporting for 5 years and adding a provision for mandatory reporting of wholesale pork cuts. The Act was signed by the President on September 28, 2010. Congress directed the Secretary to engage in negotiated rulemaking to make required regulatory changes for mandatory wholesale pork reporting. Further, Congress required that the negotiated rulemaking committee include representatives from (i) organizations representing swine producers; (ii) organizations representing packers of pork, processors of pork, retailers of pork, and buyers of wholesale pork; (iii) the Department of Agriculture; and (iv) interested parties that participate in swine or pork production.

Statement of Need:

Implementation of mandatory pork reporting is required by Congress. Congress delegated responsibility to the Secretary for determining what information is necessary and appropriate. The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-234) directed the Secretary to conduct a study to determine advantages, drawbacks, and potential implementation issues associated with adopting mandatory wholesale pork reporting. The report from this study generally concluded that voluntary wholesale pork price reporting is thin and becoming thinner, and some degree of support for moving to mandatory price reporting exists at every segment of the industry interviewed. The report was delivered to Congress on March 25, 2010.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Livestock Mandatory Reporting is authorized under the Agricultural Marketing Act (7 U.S.C. 1635 to 1636). The Livestock and Seed Program of USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service has day-to-day responsibility for collecting and disseminating LMR data.

Alternatives:

There are no alternatives, as this rulemaking is a matter of law based on the Mandatory Price Reporting Act of 2010.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

Estimation of costs will follow the previous methodology used in earlier Livestock Mandatory Reporting rulemaking. The focus of the cost estimation is the burden placed on reporting companies in providing pork marketing data to the Livestock and Seed Program. Previous rulemaking cost estimates of boxed beef reporting of similar data found the burden to be an annual total of 65 hours in additional reporting requirements per firm. Because no official USDA grade standards are used in the marketing of pork, and there are fewer cutting styles, the burden for pork reporting firms in comparison with beef reporting firms could be lower. However, the impact is not truly known at this stage.

Risks:

Implementing wholesale pork reporting presents few risks to the Agency and the impacted industry. Members of the industry who served on the negotiated rulemaking committee expressed some concern with reporting prices under a different reporting basis than what is used for voluntary pork reporting. However, ultimately the committee reached consensus on having prices reporting on both an FOB Omaha and FOB Plant basis in order to reduce market volatility.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

Changes to Livestock Mandatory Reporting

11/24/10

75 FR 71568

Wholesale Pork Reporting; Notice of Meeting

01/26/11

76 FR 4554

NPRM

02/00/12

Final Action

10/00/12

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses.

Government Levels Affected:

None.

Agency Contact:

Michael P. Lynch, Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, 14th and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250,

Phone:

202 720-6231.

RIN:

0581-AD07

USDA—AMS

2. • National Organic Program: Sunset Review for Nutrient Vitamins and Minerals (NOP-10-0083)

Priority:

Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 6501

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 205.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

This proposed rule would address a recommendation submitted to the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) on April 29, 2011. The recommendation pertains to the 2012 Sunset Review of the listing for nutrient vitamins and minerals on the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances (National List). As recommended by the NOSB, the proposed rule would continue the exemption (use) for nutrient vitamins and minerals for 5 years after the October 21, 2012, sunset date. In addition, the proposed rule would amend the annotation to correct an inaccurate cross reference to U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations. The proposed amendment to the annotation would clarify what synthetic substances are allowed as nutrient vitamins and minerals in organic products labeled as “organic” or “made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s)).”

Statement of Need:

The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has determined that the current exemption for the use of nutrient vitamins and minerals in organic products in the National Organic Program (NOP) regulations (7 CFR part 205) is inaccurate. The proposed rule would amend the annotation for nutrient vitamins and minerals to correct an inaccurate cross reference to U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations. In effect, the proposed amendment would clarify what synthetic substances are allowed as nutrient vitamins and minerals in organic products. Further, the NOP regulations do not correctly provide for the fortification of infant formula that would meet FDA requirements. This proposed rule would incorporate the correct FDA citation with respect to the addition of required vitamins and minerals to organic infant formula.

Summary of Legal Basis:

This proposed rule would address a recommendation submitted to the Secretary of Agriculture by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) on April 29, 2011, to continue the exemption for nutrient vitamins and minerals in organic products as provided by the NOP National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances (National List). The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA) authorizes the Secretary to amend the National List based on proposed amendments developed by the NOSB. The Sunset Provision, in section 6517(e) of the OFPA, provides that no exemption or prohibition on the National List will remain valid after 5 years unless the exemption or prohibition has been reviewed and the Secretary renews the listing. The exemption for nutrient vitamins and minerals is scheduled to sunset on October 21, 2012.

Alternatives:

AMS considered two alternatives to this proposed rulemaking: (1) Renew the existing listing for nutrient vitamins and minerals or (2), in lieu of a rule, issue guidance stating NOP's intent to interpret the current listing for nutrient vitamins and minerals as proposed in this action. AMS determined that neither alternative is viable as both would retain a regulatory provision that is inaccurate and remains vulnerable to misinterpretations of what substances are permitted in organic products.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

This proposed rule would establish a finite list of essential and required vitamins and minerals for use in organic food and infant formula. The action addresses the requests of a broad spectrum of public commenters for clarification on the parameters for adding nutrient vitamins and minerals to organic products and is expected to reduce the submission of consumer complaints alleging the unlawful addition of substances to organic products. This proposed rule would also provide more certainty to certifying agents and organic operations in determining whether substances are acceptable for use in organic products. Further, this proposed action also would foster greater transparency by ensuring that exemptions for the use of vitamins, minerals, and other nutrients are subject to National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) evaluation in accordance with the criteria established in OFPA.

This action could directly impact a subset of certified organic operations, which add substances to organic products that are not essential vitamins and minerals for human nutrition (21 CFR 101.9) or required vitamins and minerals for infant formula (21 CFR 107.100 or 107.10), as enumerated by FDA regulation. AMS believes the impacts will be concentrated within five categories of organic products in which nutrient supplementation has been more prevalent: Infant formula, baby food, milk, breakfast cereal, and pet food. The proposed rule could indirectly impact producers who supply organic agricultural commodities to affected product categories. However, AMS expects that there will be opportunities for producers to divert organic agricultural products to other purchasers to buffer the impact of any disruption to the manufacture of certain processed organic products as a result of this proposed action.

There are several impact mitigation factors which are expected to reduce the costs of complying with this proposed action. AMS is proposing a 2-year implementation phase, which is intended to provide time for NOSB to consider petitions for substances that are affected by this action and for AMS to conclude any rulemaking to add substances to the National List. The implementation phase would also provide entities the time to explore reformulation of affected products. Further, if some products are discontinued as a result of this proposed rule, AMS anticipates that some consumers will purchase, as an alternative, an organic product within the same category rather than a nonorganic product.

Risks:

For the 2-year implementation phase to function as a mitigation measure, the timeframe may be tight to complete the review of petitions received by publication of this proposed rule and for any rulemaking action recommended by NOSB. Therefore, AMS has requested comments on the length of the implementation phase as part of this proposed rule.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

01/12/12

77 FR 1980

NPRM Comment Period End

03/12/12

Final Action

10/00/12

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Undetermined.

Government Levels Affected:

Local, State.

Agency Contact:

Melissa R. Bailey, Director, Standards Division, Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Washington, DC 20250,

Phone:

202 720-3252,

Fax:

202 205-7808,

Email: melissa.bailey@usda.gov.

Related RIN:

Split from 0581-AC96.

RIN:

0581-AD17

USDA—ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE (APHIS)

Proposed Rule Stage

3. Animal Welfare; Regulations and Standards for Birds

Priority:

Other Significant.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 2131 to 2159

CFR Citation:

9 CFR 1 to 3.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

APHIS intends to establish standards for the humane handling, care, treatment, and transportation of birds other than birds bred for use in research.

Statement of Need:

The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 amended the definition of animal in the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) by specifically excluding birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research. While the definition of animal in the regulations contained in 9 CFR part 1 has excluded rats of the genus Rattus and mice of the genus Mus bred for use in research, that definition has also excluded all birds (

i.e.,

not just those birds bred for use in research). In line with this change to the definition of animal in the AWA, APHIS intends to establish standards in 9 CFR part 3 for the humane handling, care, treatment, and transportation of birds other than those birds bred for use in research and to revise the regulations in 9 CFR parts 1 and 2 to make them applicable to birds.

Summary of Legal Basis:

The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to promulgate standards and other requirements governing the humane handling, care, treatment, and transportation of certain animals by dealers, research facilities, exhibitors, operators of auction sales, and carriers and immediate handlers. Animals covered by the AWA include birds that are not bred for use in research.

Alternatives:

To be identified.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

Benefits of the rule would stem from improvements in the humane handling and care of birds by affected dealers, exhibitors, carriers, and intermediate handlers. At a minimum, these entities would be required to satisfy certain reporting provisions and undergo periodic compliance inspections by APHIS—measures that they are not subject to now with respect to birds. Regulated entities, therefore, may incur certain costs because of the proposed rule. Most facilities that use birds in research, such as pharmaceutical companies, universities, and research institutes, would not be affected. Retail pet stores could be affected to the extent that regulatory costs are passed on to them by breeders and other suppliers.

Most entities affected by the proposal are likely to be small in size, based on Small Business Administration standards. We have not been able to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the rule's potential economic impact because of the paucity of available data on the affected industries. APHIS welcomes public comment that would permit a more complete assessment of the proposed rule's impact.

Risks:

Not applicable.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

05/00/12

NPRM Comment Period End

08/00/12

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses.

Government Levels Affected:

Undetermined.

Additional Information:

Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at

http://www.aphis.usda.gov.

Agency Contact:

Johanna Briscoe, Veterinary Medical Officer and Avian Specialist, Animal Care, Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 4700 River Road, Unit 84, Riverdale, MD 20737-1234,

Phone:

301 734-0658.

RIN:

0579-AC02

USDA—APHIS

4. Plant Pest Regulations; Update of General Provisions

Priority:

Other Significant.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 450; 7 U.S.C. 2260; 7 U.S.C. 7701 to 7772; 7 U.S.C. 7781 to 7786; 7 U.S.C. 8301 to 8817; 19 U.S.C. 136; 21 U.S.C. 111; 21 U.S.C. 114a; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 4331 and 4332

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 318 and 319; 7 CFR 330; 7 CFR 352.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

We are proposing to revise our regulations regarding the movement of plant pests. We are proposing to regulate the movement of, not only plant pests, but also biological control organisms and associated articles. We are proposing risk-based criteria regarding the movement of biological control organisms and are proposing to exempt certain types of plant pests from permitting requirements for their interstate movement and movement for environmental release. We are also proposing to revise our regulations regarding the movement of soil and to establish regulations governing the biocontainment facilities in which plant pests, biological control organisms, and associated articles are held. This proposed rule replaces a previously published proposed rule, which we are withdrawing as part of this document. This proposal would clarify the factors that would be considered when assessing the risks associated with the movement of certain organisms, facilitate the movement of regulated organisms and articles in a manner that also protects U.S. agriculture, and address gaps in the current regulations.

Statement of Need:

APHIS is preparing a proposed rule to revise its regulations regarding the movement of plant pests. The revised regulations would address the importation and interstate movement of plant pests, biological control organisms, and associated articles, and the release into the environment of biological control organisms. The revision would also address the movement of soil and establish regulations governing the biocontainment facilities in which plant pests, biological control organisms, and associated articles are held. This proposal would clarify the factors that would be considered when assessing the risks associated with the movement of certain organisms, facilitate the movement of regulated organisms and articles in a manner that also protects U.S. agriculture, and address gaps in the current regulations.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Under section 411(a) of the Plant Protection Act (PPA), no person shall import, enter, export, or move in interstate commerce any plant pest, unless the importation, entry, exportation, or movement is authorized under a general or specific permit and in accordance with such regulations as the Secretary of Agriculture may issue to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States or the dissemination of plant pests within the United States.

Under section 412 of the PPA, the Secretary may restrict the importation or movement in interstate commerce of biological control organisms by requiring the organisms to be accompanied by a permit authorizing such movement and by subjecting the organisms to quarantine conditions or other remedial measures deemed necessary to prevent the spread of plant pests or noxious weeds. That same section of the PPA also gives the Secretary explicit authority to regulate the movement of associated articles.

Alternatives:

The alternatives we considered were taking no action at this time or implementing a comprehensive

risk reduction plan. This latter alternative would be characterized as a broad risk mitigation strategy that could involve various options such as increased inspection, regulations specific to a certain organism or group of related organisms, or extensive biocontainment requirements.

We decided against the first alternative because leaving the regulations unchanged would not address the needs identified immediately above. We decided against the latter alternative, because available scientific information, personnel, and resources suggest that it would be impracticable at this time.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

To be determined.

Risks:

Unless we issue such a proposal, the regulations will not provide a clear protocol for obtaining permits that authorize the movement and environmental release of biological control organisms. This, in turn, could impede research to explore biological control options for various plant pests and noxious weeds known to exist within the United States, and could indirectly lead to the further dissemination of such pests and weeds.

Moreover, unless we revise the soil regulations, certain provisions in the regulations will not adequately address the risk to plants, plant parts, and plant products within the United States that such soil might present.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

10/20/09

74 FR 53673

Notice Comment Period End

11/19/09

NPRM

05/00/12

NPRM Comment Period End

07/00/12

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses, Organizations.

Government Levels Affected:

Local, State, Tribal.

International Impacts:

This regulatory action will be likely to have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of international interest.

Additional Information:

Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at

http://www.aphis.usda.gov.

Agency Contact:

Shirley Wager—Page Chief, Pest Permitting Branch, Plant Health Programs, PPQ, Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 4700 River Road, Unit 131, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236,

Phone:

301 734-8453.

RIN:

0579-AC98

USDA—APHIS

Final Rule Stage

5. Importation of Live Dogs

Priority:

Other Significant.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 2148

CFR Citation:

9 CFR 1 and 2.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

This rulemaking would amend the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) regulations to regulate dogs imported for resale as required by a recent amendment to the AWA. Importation of dogs for resale would be prohibited unless the dogs are in good health, have all necessary vaccinations, and are 6 months of age or older. This proposal would also reflect the exemptions provided in the amendment to the AWA for dogs imported for research purposes or veterinary treatment and for dogs legally imported into the State of Hawaii from the British Isles, Australia, Guam, or New Zealand.

Statement of Need:

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 mandates that the Secretary of Agriculture promulgate regulations to implement and enforce new provisions of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) regarding the importation of dogs for resale. In line with the changes to the AWA, APHIS intends to amend the regulations in 9 CFR parts 1 and 2 to regulate the importation of dogs for resale.

Summary of Legal Basis:

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-246, signed into law on Jun. 18, 2008) added a new section to the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2147) to restrict the importation of live dogs for resale. As amended, the AWA now prohibits the importation of dogs into the United States for resale unless the Secretary of Agriculture determines that the dogs are in good health, have received all necessary vaccinations, and are at least 6 months of age. Exceptions are provided for dogs imported for research purposes or veterinary treatment. An exception to the 6-month age requirement is also provided for dogs that are lawfully imported into Hawaii for resale purposes from the British Isles, Australia, Guam, or New Zealand in compliance with the applicable regulations of Hawaii, provided the dogs are vaccinated, are in good health, and are not transported out of Hawaii for resale purposes at less than 6 months of age.

Alternatives:

To be identified.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

To be determined.

Risks:

Not applicable.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

09/01/11

76 FR 54392

NPRM Comment Period End

10/31/11

Final Rule

08/00/12

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Undetermined.

Government Levels Affected:

None.

Additional Information:

Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at

http://www.aphis.usda.gov.

Agency Contact:

Gerald Rushin, Veterinary Medical Officer, Animal Care, Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 4700 River Road, Unit 84, Riverdale, MD 20737-1234,

Phone:

301 734-0954.

RIN:

0579-AD23

USDA—APHIS

6. Animal Disease Traceability

Priority:

Other Significant.

Legal Authority:

7 U.S.C. 8305

CFR Citation:

9 CFR 90.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

This rulemaking would establish a new part in the Code of Federal Regulations containing minimum national identification and documentation requirements for livestock moving interstate. The proposed regulations specify approved forms of official identification for each species covered under this rulemaking but would allow such livestock to be moved interstate with another form of identification, as agreed upon by animal health officials in the shipping and receiving States or tribes. The purpose of the new regulations is to improve our ability to trace livestock in the event that disease is found.

Statement of Need:

Preventing and controlling animal disease is the cornerstone of protecting American animal agriculture. While ranchers and farmers work hard to protect their animals and their livelihoods, there is never a guarantee that their animals will be spared from disease. To support their efforts, USDA has enacted regulations to prevent, control, and eradicate disease, and to increase foreign and domestic confidence in the safety of animals and animal products. Traceability helps give

that reassurance. Traceability does not prevent disease, but knowing where diseased and at-risk animals are, where they have been, and when, is indispensable in emergency response and in ongoing disease programs. The primary objective of these proposed regulations is to improve our ability to trace livestock in the event that disease is found in a manner that continues to ensure the smooth flow of livestock in interstate commerce.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Under the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301

et seq.

), the Secretary of Agriculture may prohibit or restrict the interstate movement of any animal to prevent the introduction or dissemination of any pest or disease of livestock, and may carry out operations and measures to detect, control, or eradicate any pest or disease of livestock. The Secretary may promulgate such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the Act.

Alternatives:

As part of its ongoing efforts to safeguard animal health, APHIS initiated implementation of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) in 2004. More recently, the Agency launched an effort to assess the level of acceptance of NAIS through meetings with the Secretary, listening sessions in 14 cities, and public comments. Although there was some support for NAIS, the vast majority of participants were highly critical of the program and of USDA's implementation efforts. The feedback revealed that NAIS has become a barrier to achieving meaningful animal disease traceability in the United States in partnership with America's producers.

The option we are proposing pertains strictly to interstate movement and gives States and tribes the flexibility to identify and implement the traceability approaches that work best for them.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

A workable and effective animal traceability system would enhance animal health programs, leading to more secure market access and other societal gains. Traceability can reduce the cost of disease outbreaks, minimizing losses to producers and industries by enabling current and previous locations of potentially exposed animals to be readily identified. Trade benefits can include increased competitiveness in global markets generally, and when outbreaks do occur, the mitigation of export market losses through regionalization. Markets benefit through more efficient and timely epidemiological investigation of animal health issues.

Other societal benefits include improved animal welfare during natural disasters.

The main economic effect of the rule is expected to be on the beef and cattle industry. For other species such as horses and other equine species, poultry, sheep and goats, swine, and captive cervids, APHIS would largely maintain and build on the identification requirements of existing disease program regulations.

Costs of an animal traceability system would include those for tags and interstate certificates of veterinary inspection (ICVIs) or other movement documentation, for animals moved interstate. Incremental costs incurred are expected to vary depending upon a number of factors, including whether an enterprise does or does not already use eartags to identify individual cattle. For many operators, costs of official animal identification and ICVIs would be similar, respectively, to costs associated with current animal identification practices and the in-shipment documentation currently required by individual States. To the extent that official animal identification and ICVIs would simply replace current requirements, the incremental costs of the rule for private enterprises would be minimal.

Risks:

This rulemaking is being undertaken to address the animal health risks posed by gaps in the existing regulations concerning identification of livestock being moved interstate. The current lack of a comprehensive animal traceability program is impairing our ability to trace animals that may be infected with disease.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

08/11/11

76 FR 50082

NPRM Comment Period End

11/09/11

Final Rule

08/00/12

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

No.

Small Entities Affected:

Businesses.

Government Levels Affected:

State, Tribal.

Additional Information:

Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at

http://www.aphis.usda.gov.

Agency Contact:

Neil Hammerschmidt, Program Manager, Animal Disease Traceability, VS, Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 4700 River Road, Unit 46, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231,

Phone:

301 734-5571.

RIN:

0579-AD24

USDA—FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE (FNS)

Proposed Rule Stage

7. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Farm Bill of 2008 Retailer Sanctions

Priority:

Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.

Legal Authority:

Pub. L. 110-246

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 276.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

Statement of Need:

This proposed rule would implement provisions under section 4132 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, also referred to as the Farm Bill of 2008. Under section 4132, the Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is provided with greater authority and flexibility when sanctioning retail or wholesale food stores that violate Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) rules. Specifically, the Department is authorized to assess a civil penalty and to disqualify a retail or wholesale food store authorized to participate in SNAP. Previously, the Department could assess a civil penalty or disqualification, but not both. Section 4132 also eliminates the minimum disqualification period, which was previously set at 6 months. In addition to implementing statutory provisions, this rule proposes to provide a clear administrative penalty when an authorized retailer or wholesale food store redeems a SNAP participant's program benefits without the knowledge of the participant. All program benefits are issued through the Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) system. The EBT system establishes data that may be used to identify fraud committed by retail food stores. While stealing program benefits could be prosecuted under current statute, program

regulations do not provide a clear penalty for these thefts. The proposed rule would establish an administrative penalty for such thefts equivalent to the penalty for trafficking in program benefits, which is the permanent disqualification of a retailer or wholesale food store from SNAP participation. Finally, the Department proposes to identify additional administrative retail violations and the associated sanction that would be imposed against the retail food store for committing the violation. For instance, to maintain integrity, FNS requires retail and wholesale food stores to key enter EBT card data in the presence of the actual EBT card. The proposed rule would codify this requirement and identify the specific sanction that would be imposed if retail food stores are found to be in violation.

Summary of Legal Basis:

Section 4132, Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-246).

Alternatives:

Because this proposed rule is under development, alternatives are not yet articulated.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

Because this proposed rule is under development, anticipated costs and benefits have not yet been articulated.

Risks:

The risk that retail or wholesale food stores will violate SNAP rules, or continue to violate SNAP rules, is expected to be reduced by refining program sanctions for participating retailers and wholesalers.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

02/00/12

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Undetermined.

Government Levels Affected:

Undetermined.

Federalism:

Undetermined.

Additional Information:

Note:

This RIN replaces the previously issued RIN 0584-AD78.

Agency Contact:

James F. Herbert, Regulatory Review Specialist, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, 10th Floor, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22302,

Phone:

703 305-2572,

Email: james.herbert@fns.usda.gov.

RIN:

0584-AD88

USDA—FNS

8. • National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs: Nutrition Standards for All Foods Sold in School, as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010

Priority:

Other Significant.

Unfunded Mandates:

Undetermined.

Legal Authority:

Pub. L. 111-296

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 210; 7 CFR 220.

Legal Deadline:

None.

Abstract:

This proposed rule would codify the following provisions of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (Pub. L. 111-296; the Act) as appropriate, under 7 CFR parts 210 and 220.

Section 203 requires schools participating in the National School Lunch Program to make available to children free of charge, as nutritionally appropriate, potable water for consumption in the place where meals are served during meal service.

Section 208 requires the Secretary to promulgate proposed regulations to establish science-based nutrition standards for all foods sold in schools not later than December 13, 2011. The nutrition standards would apply to all food sold outside the school meal programs, on the school campus, and at any time during the school day. (11-004)

Statement of Need:

This proposed rule would codify the following provisions of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (Pub. L. 111-296; the Act) as appropriate, under 7 CFR parts 210 and 220.

Summary of Legal Basis:

There is no existing regulatory requirement to make water available where meals are served. Regulations at 7 CFR parts 210.11 direct State agencies and school food authorities to establish such rules or regulations necessary to control the sale of foods in competition with lunches served under the NSLP. Such rules or regulations shall prohibit the sale of foods of minimal nutritional value in the food service areas during the lunch periods. The sale of other competitive foods may, at the discretion of the State agency and school food authority, be allowed in the food service area during the lunch period only if all income from the sale of such foods accrues to the benefit of the nonprofit school food service or the school or student organizations approved by the school. State agencies and school food authorities may impose additional restrictions on the sale of and income from all foods sold at any time throughout schools participating in the Program.

Alternatives:

None.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits:

Expected Costs Analysis and Budgetary Effects Statement: The Congressional Budget Office determined these provisions would incur no Federal costs.

Expected Benefits of the Proposed Action:

The provisions in this proposed rulemaking would result in better nutrition for all school children.

Risks:

None known.

Timetable:

Action

Date

FR Cite

NPRM

04/00/12

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:

Yes.

Small Entities Affected:

Governmental Jurisdictions.

Government Levels Affected:

Local, State.

Agency Contact:

James F. Herbert, Regulatory Review Specialist, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, 10th Floor, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22302,

Phone:

703 305-2572,

Email: james.herbert@fns.usda.gov.

RIN:

0584-AE09

USDA—FNS

9. • WIC: Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) Implementation

Priority:

Other Significant.

Unfunded Mandates:

Undetermined.

Legal Authority:

Pub. L. 111-296

CFR Citation:

7 CFR 246.

Legal Deadline:

NPRM, Statutory, October 1, 2020, Require all WIC State agencies to implement EBT Statewide.

Abstract:

This proposed rule would revise and expand regulations regarding WIC EBT at 7 CFR 246 and implement statutory provisions related to EBT as defined in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, Public Law 11-296. The EBT requirements addressed in the proposed rule would promote improved access to Program benefits, standardize EBT operations, and establish

implementation guidelines and timeframes.

Statement of Need:

This proposed rule would revise and expand regulations regarding WIC EBT at 7 CFR 246 and implement statutory provisions related to EBT as defined in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, Public Law 11-296. The EBT requirements addressed in the proposed rule would promote improved access to program benefits, standardize EBT operations, and establish implementation guidelines and timeframes.

WIC EBT has been an ongoing effort within the WIC community for several years. The proposed rule would address the following:

• Set forth the definition of EBT.

• Require all WIC State agencies to implement EBT statewide by October 1, 2020.

• Require State agencies to submit status reports demonstrating their progress toward Statewide EBT implementation.

• Revise the current provision regarding the imposition of EBT costs to vendors to include: (1) The formation of cost-sharing criteria associated with any equipment or system not solely dedicated to EBT; (2) the allowance of the payment of fees imposed by a third-party processor for EBT transactions; (3) the disallowance of the payment o

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.