Title II Programmatic Monetization Guidelines for Fiscal Year 2000
Federal RegisterMay 24, 1999
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Title II Programmatic Monetization Guidelines for Fiscal Year
2000
Pursuant to the Agricultural trade Development and Assistance Act
of 1954, as amended (Pub. L. 480), notice is hereby given that the
following guidelines are available to interested parties for the
required thirty (30) day comment period.
Programmatic Guideline Being Applied by the Bureau for Humanitarian
Response, Office of Food for peace (BHR/FFP) in Review of Fiscal Year
(FY) 2000 Public Law (Pub. L.) 480 Title II Commodity Monetization
Activities:
Background: The following programmatic principles concerning the
monetization of agricultural commodities being made available to
eligible organizations under the PL 480 Title II Program were
enunciated by the Deputy Assistant Administrator of USAID's Bureau of
Humanitarian Response (BHR) Leonard Rogers to the Food Aid Consultative
Group (FACG) at its Semi-Annual Consultation in Washington, DC on March
25, 1999. They reflect discussions by USAID/BHR, USDA, FACG members,
Congressional staff and those of the U.S. food export and processing
industries between December 1998 and March 1999. These guidelines will
be used in a pilot program over approximately the next two years in
conjunction with BHR/FFP's Modernization Field manual, Pub. L. 480
Title II Programs, and the Development Activity Proposal (DAP) and
Previously Approved Activity (PAA) Guidelines released on October 16
and December 8, 1998 respectively, in review of cooperating sponsor
monetization activities proposed in Title II-assisted development
interventions:
1. In general, Title II Monetization activities will not be
undertaken where they would disrupt commercial markets for U.S.--
produced agricultural commodities;
2. Proposals advocating the monetization of value-added (i.e.
processed, fortified, bagged, or refined) Title II commodities and
sales designed and executed in consultation with the U.S. food export
and processing trade will receive priority;
3. BHR/FFP will give priority to monetization in the recipient
country;
4. Priority will also be given to monetizations supporting or
complementing the direct distribution of value-added Title II
commodities and/or resulting in benefits directly linked to the
reduction of hunger;
5. Development interventions entirely based on the monetization of
Title II commodities will also continue to be considered by BHR/FFP so
long as their benefits can be directly linked to reduction of food
insecurity and where the U.S. food itself has a clear benefit to hungry
people.
6. If there are compelling reasons that preclude in-country
monetization, consideration will be given to monetization in an
adjacent (i.e. a closely neighboring) country following consultations
with U.S. commercial interests in all instances. Regional monetization
beyond adjacent countries will be considered only on an exception basis
and only after full consultations.
In an effort to determine whether these guidelines should be
permanently used in allocating Pub. L. Title II resources for
monetization activities by eligible organizations, they will be
assessed by USAID/BHR/FFP together with the Food Aid Consultative
Group, Congressional oversight committees, the Department of
Agriculture, representatives of the U.S. food export and processing
trade, and others concerned.
Individuals who have questions or comments on these guidelines
should contact David R. Nelson at (202) 712-1828, Office of Food for
Peace, Agency for International Development, RRB 7.06-120, 1300
Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC 20523-0809.
The thirty day comment period will begin on the date that this
announcement is published in the Federal Register.
Dated: May 14, 1999.
William T. Oliver,
Director, Office of Food for Peace Bureau for Humanitarian Response.
[FR Doc. 99-12807 Filed 5-21-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6116-01-M
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.