81832 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1To view the interim rule, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/ 

main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2010-0004. 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

7 CFR Part 301 

[Docket No. APHIS–2010–0004] 

Asian Longhorned Beetle; Quarantined 

Area and Regulated Articles 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Affirmation of interim rule as 

final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting as a final 

rule, without change, an interim rule 

that amended the Asian longhorned 

beetle regulations by adding a portion of 

Worcester County, MA, to the list of 

quarantined areas and restricting the 

interstate movement of regulated 

articles from that area. The interim rule 

also updated the list of regulated articles 

in order to reflect new information 

concerning host plants. The interim rule 

was necessary to prevent the artificial 

spread of Asian longhorned beetle to 

noninfested areas of the United States. 

As a result of the interim rule, the 

interstate movement of regulated 

articles from the quarantined area is 

restricted. 

DATES: Effective on December 29, 2010, 

we are adopting as a final rule the 

interim rule published at 75 FR 34320– 

34322 on June 17, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Claudia Ferguson, Regulatory Policy 

Specialist, Regulations, Permits, and 

Import Manuals, APHIS, 4700 River 

Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737– 

1231; (301) 734–0754. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Asian longhorned beetle (ALB, 

Anoplophora glabripennis), an insect 

native to China, Japan, Korea, and the 

Isle of Hainan, is a destructive pest of 

hardwood trees. It attacks many healthy 

hardwood trees, including maple, horse 

chestnut, birch, poplar, willow, and 

elm. In addition, nursery stock, logs, 

green lumber, firewood, stumps, roots, 

branches, and wood debris of half an 

inch or more in diameter are subject to 

infestation. The beetle bores into the 

heartwood of a host tree, eventually 

killing the tree. Immature beetles bore 

into tree trunks and branches, causing 

heavy sap flow from wounds and 

sawdust accumulation at tree bases. 

They feed on, and over-winter in, the 

interiors of trees. Adult beetles emerge 

in the spring and summer months from 

round holes approximately threeeighths of an inch in diameter (about the 

size of a dime) that they bore through 

branches and trunks of trees. After 

emerging, adult beetles feed for 2 to 3 

days and then mate. Adult females then 

lay eggs in oviposition sites that they 

make on the branches of trees. A new 

generation of ALB is produced each 

year. If this pest moves into the 

hardwood forests of the United States, 

the nursery, maple syrup, and forest 

product industries could experience 

severe economic losses. In addition, 

urban and forest ALB infestations will 

result in environmental damage, 

aesthetic deterioration, and a reduction 

of public enjoyment of recreational 

spaces. 

In an interim rule 1 effective and 

published in the Federal Register on 

June 17, 2010 (75 FR 34320–34322, 

Docket No. APHIS–2010–0004), we 

amended the Asian longhorned beetle 

regulations in 7 CFR part 301 by adding 

a portion of Worcester County, MA, to 

the list of quarantined areas, restricting 

the interstate movement of regulated 

articles from that area, and updating the 

list of regulated articles to include the 

Katsura tree (Cercidiphyllum spp). 

Comments on the interim rule were 

required to be received on or before 

August 16, 2010. We did not receive any 

comments. Therefore, for the reasons 

given in the interim rule, we are 

adopting the interim rule as a final rule 

without change. 

This action also affirms the 

information contained in the interim 

rule concerning Executive Order 12866 

and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 

Executive Orders 12372 and 12988, and 

the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

Further, for this action, the Office of 

Management and Budget has waived its 

review under Executive Order 12866. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301 

Agricultural commodities, Plant 

diseases and pests, Quarantine, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Transportation. 

PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE 

NOTICES 

■ Accordingly, we are adopting as a 

final rule, without change, the interim 

rule that amended 7 CFR part 301 and 

that was published at 75 FR 34320– 

34322 on June 17, 2010. 

Done in Washington, DC on December 22, 

2010. 

Kevin Shea, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32768 Filed 12–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Natural Resources Conservation 

Service 

7 CFR Part 652 

Technical Service Provider Assistance 

CFR Correction 

In Title 7 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, Parts 400 to 699, revised as 

of Jan. 1, 2010, on page 565, in § 652.2, 

the first definition for ‘‘Technical 

service’’ is removed. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32945 Filed 12–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Farm Service Agency 

7 CFR Part 707 

RIN 0560–AH91 

Prevention of Payments to Deceased 

Persons 

AGENCY: Farm Service Agency, USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Farm Service Agency 

(FSA) is amending regulations as 

required by the Food, Conservation, and 

Energy Act of 2008 (the 2008 Farm Bill) 

to clarify the regulations governing 

payments earned by persons who die, 

disappear, or are declared incompetent 

before the payment is made. The 

payments must have been timely 

requested by that person themselves or 

by an authorized representative. These 

amendments are intended to clarify 

payment provisions and to prevent 

incorrect payments, particularly with 

respect to instances where persons have 

died. Payment eligibility where the 

payment was earned by persons who 

have since died is the subject of a 

specific 2008 Farm Bill requirement 

addressed in this rule. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 29, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Candace Thompson, Director, 

Production, Emergencies and 

Compliance Division, FSA, US 

Department of Agriculture (USDA), Mail 

Stop 0517, 1400 Independence Avenue, 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81833 

SW., Washington, DC 20250–0517; 

telephone: (202) 720–3463; electronic 

mail: Candy.Thompson@wdc.usda.gov. 

Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means for communication 

(Braille, large print, audio tape, etc.) 

should contact the USDA Target Center 

at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Current FSA regulations in 7 CFR part 

707 govern certain farm related 

payments earned by persons who have 

died, disappeared, or been declared 

incompetent before the payment was 

made. Section 1611 of the 2008 Farm 

Bill (Pub. L. 110–246, 7 U.S.C. 8786) 

requires, with respect to persons who 

have died, that FSA clarify these 

regulations to describe the 

circumstances in which such payments 

will be made. This rule, however, 

addresses all three subjects covered in 

the part 707 regulations (death, 

disappearance, and a finding of 

incompetency). The 2008 Farm Bill also 

requires the Secretary of Agriculture to 

reconcile data with the Social Security 

Administration (SSA) to determine if 

persons receiving payments are alive. 

As discussed below, by the time the 

2008 Farm Bill was enacted, FSA had 

implemented that required data 

reconciliation process and other 

procedures intended to address 

previous Government Accountability 

Office (GAO) concerns with payments 

on behalf of deceased persons. 

This rule adds a new paragraph to 

§ 707.3 to specify payment eligibility for 

estates and surviving family members of 

deceased persons. The new paragraph 

makes explicit that payment will not be 

made on behalf of a deceased person 

unless the payment was earned by that 

person before the person died and was 

requested by the person themselves or 

their authorized representative before 

they died or after their death by a 

person authorized by law, independent 

of these FSA regulations, to act for that 

person. The rules in part 707 specify to 

whom the payment will be made if there 

is a proper application, but that issue is 

separate from the question of whether 

the payment has been properly applied 

for by the deceased or someone 

authorized by law to act for the 

deceased before or after the death. 

Payment must have been requested 

before the person died or requested after 

the death by someone authorized by law 

(independently of the part 707 

regulations) to act for the deceased. 

Assuming a proper application for 

payment has been made, § 707.3 

specifies the order of precedence for 

potential payees, which includes 

executors and surviving family 

members. That order is not changed in 

this rule. Again, that order of 

precedence applies only if there was a 

proper application for payment by 

someone authorized to act for the 

deceased (including the deceased prior 

to the death). For example, if a husband 

individually earned a disaster payment 

and applied for the payment before his 

death but the payment had not yet been 

made when the death occurred, there 

are some instances under § 707.3 in 

which the deceased’s spouse could 

receive the payment under the terms of 

that section even though the spouse did 

not have the power under local law to 

act for the deceased. On the other hand, 

if the deceased had not applied for the 

payment, though had otherwise earned 

the payment, and there was no one 

legally authorized to act for the 

deceased, the payment rules of § 707.3 

would not apply. They would only 

apply if someone could act for the 

deceased and then filed the application, 

at which point the payment rules of 

§ 707.3 would apply. In this manner, the 

question of who can file the application 

and who can receive the payment can be 

two separate issues. One of those issues 

(the issue of who is legally authorized 

to act for the deceased) may have to be 

resolved independently of part 707. 

This is clarified in this rule for all 

matters covered in that part. Those three 

matters are death, disappearance, and a 

finding of incompetency. These 

amendments all clarify rather than 

change current FSA practice. 

Also, because of changes in the 2008 

Farm Bill on payment limitations, the 

term ‘‘person’’ is now taken to mean 

only individuals, as opposed to 

‘‘entities,’’ and payments are attributed 

to individuals through corporations. 

The regulations in this rule only provide 

the clarifications noted above. The 

regulations in this rule do not cover the 

attribution of payments for payment 

limitation purposes. The amount of an 

actual payment eligibility would be 

covered by the regulations that cover the 

specific program in which the payment 

was earned and the general payment 

limitation regulations found in 7 CFR 

part 1400. 

Section 1611 of the 2008 Farm Bill, 

the authority for this rule concerning 

prevention of improper payments to the 

deceased, uses the term ‘‘individual.’’ To 

be consistent with the payment 

limitation and attribution rules in 7 CFR 

part 1400 and with the existing 7 CFR 

part 707, and to provide needed clarity 

on payment eligibility, this rule uses the 

term ‘‘person’’ to mean an ‘‘individual.’’ 

Additional Information on Data 

Reconciliation Procedures 

In addition to the specific 

amendments made in the rule, FSA has 

strengthened and will continue to 

strengthen data reconciliation 

procedures to ensure that payments 

made on behalf of deceased persons are 

not disbursed incorrectly. The rest of 

this preamble to the rule describes those 

activities and provides some 

background on why and how they were 

implemented. 

The issuance of payments to deceased 

individuals was the subject of a 2007 

GAO audit. In July 2007, the GAO 

released an audit report entitled ‘‘USDA 

Needs to Strengthen Controls to Prevent 

Improper Payments to Estates and 

Deceased Individuals’’ (GAO–07–818). 

Before the 2008 Farm Bill was enacted, 

FSA had already taken action to address 

the GAO audit. FSA started a datamatching process that compares 

program payment information to the 

SSA Death Master File (DMF), 

beginning with program payments 

issued in fiscal year (FY) 2007. In 

addition, FSA has strengthened 

documentation procedures at the State 

and local levels for outstanding 

payments earned by estates of deceased 

persons, to address GAO’s concern that 

FSA was not following its own 

procedures requiring such 

documentation for payment to estates 

open more than two years after the date 

of death of the deceased person. 

Review of the data-match report and 

of information on file in FSA offices 

revealed 121,527 payments in FY 2007 

totaling $108 million were disbursed on 

behalf of persons identified as deceased 

prior to the date payment was made. 

The data reconciliation review showed 

that relatively few payments made on 

behalf of deceased persons (less than 

two percent of the total dollar value of 

such payments) had any indication of 

circumstances that warranted further 

review to ensure a greater certainty of 

the accuracy of the payments. While no 

instances of deliberate fraud were 

found, the rules in our handbooks are 

being clarified with respect to the 

question of the limited circumstances in 

which payments may appropriately be 

made to estates and to surviving 

relatives of deceased persons. Related 

changes are being made in part 707 with 

respect to payments earned by persons 

who have disappeared or have been 

declared incompetent. 

Further review of payments ‘‘flagged’’ 

during the review found that most of 

these payments were in fact correct in 

amount and appropriately directed. The 

review revealed that not all persons 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
81834 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

identified as dead were in fact deceased, 

and that where an entity that included 

a deceased shareholder received a 

payment, the total payment made to the 

entity was in most cases correct and 

appropriately made. In cases where the 

entity had failed to notify FSA in a 

timely fashion that a person or entity 

member had died, the payment to the 

entity was nearly always correct and the 

same amount as if the current entity 

member information had been timely 

received. Since many small entities are 

well below the payment limits specified 

in 7 CFR part 1400 for one person, the 

death of a person with an interest in an 

entity does not necessarily reduce the 

payment to such entity even if that 

death would otherwise reduce the 

overall number of potential payment 

eligibilities for the entity such as a 

general partnership. Where the data 

reconciliation review revealed 

erroneous payments for FY 2007, FSA 

immediately started collection 

procedures. To reduce the number of 

questionable payments going forward, 

FSA now provides county offices with 

a list of persons who have been 

identified as deceased as a result of the 

data reconciliation process. 

The data reconciliation review found 

many cases in which FSA had 

appropriately made payments on behalf 

of deceased persons, but where the 

source of potential concern about the 

appropriateness of the payment was that 

the amount of time between the death 

and the payment was more than a year. 

For example, most of the FY 2007 

payments made on behalf of deceased 

persons were for the Direct and Countercyclical Program, where countercyclical payments may be disbursed 18 

months after the final enrollment period 

for the applicable year, so a person 

could have earned payments more than 

a year before the payments were issued 

for that crop. For disaster program 

benefits, the payment could be several 

years after the loss. In many cases, the 

program benefits had been requested by 

the person before the date of the 

person’s death. In this rule, the 

regulations are made more explicit to 

specify that even if the payment was not 

requested before the death, the payment 

may still be applied for by a person 

authorized by law to act for the 

deceased. If a proper application is 

filed, then the payment rules of § 707.3 

apply. As a practical matter, this means 

that if the deceased did not file an 

application before the time of death, the 

payment will likely go to the executor 

or administrator of the estate of the 

deceased for the benefit of the estate. 

Presumably the administrator or 

executor would be the only party 

authorized to act for the deceased. 

Section 707.3 provides that if there is an 

executor or administrator, then the 

payment will go to the estate. Payment 

to family members would only occur 

under § 707.3 if the payment was 

applied for prior to the death of the 

individual involved. The data 

reconciliation process also found that 

some payments that appeared to have 

been made to deceased persons were 

instead appropriately made to estates 

using the Social Security numbers of the 

deceased, or to trusts using Social 

Security numbers. 

A few payments were found to be 

erroneous, and FSA took action to 

collect refunds of those payments. The 

causes of erroneous payments did not 

appear to be fraud, because while FSA 

did not have the correct or current 

information to determine payment 

eligibility, it did not appear that 

someone had deliberately provided FSA 

with information they knew was false. 

For example, the causes of erroneous or 

improper payments made on behalf of 

deceased persons for FY 2007 included 

the following: 

• A person who had power of 

attorney for another person did not 

realize that person had died before the 

crop year for which the program 

payment applied, and that therefore the 

deceased person was not eligible for 

payment. 

• FSA was not timely informed of a 

person’s death, the formation of an 

estate for the deceased, or the settlement 

of an estate. The executor was not aware 

that FSA should have been notified, or 

the farm manager was not aware or 

informed of the death of an interest 

holder of the entity. 

FSA has made the data reconciliation 

process and use of the SSA’s DMF a part 

of its standard procedure for verifying 

payment eligibility. This is a change 

from previous procedures that 

depended on producers and their 

representatives to report producer 

deaths to FSA. For FY 2008 and 

subsequent years, quarterly reports of 

persons who have been identified as 

deceased based on the data 

reconciliation process have been made 

available to all FSA State and county 

offices. FSA offices are required to 

conduct additional data review and 

verification for such persons before 

issuing any payment, and must 

document in writing why the person, 

their estate, or their authorized 

representative is eligible for payment. 

These documentation procedures are 

specified in our updated handbooks. 

Notice and Comment 

These regulations are exempt from the 

notice and comment requirements of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

553), as specified in section 1601(c) of 

the 2008 Farm Bill, which requires that 

the regulations be promulgated and 

administered without regard to the 

notice and comment provisions of 

section 553 of title 5 of the United States 

Code or the Statement of Policy of the 

Secretary of Agriculture effective July 

24, 1971, (36 FR 13804) relating to 

notices of proposed rulemaking and 

public participation in rulemaking. 

Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) designated this rule as 

significant under Executive Order 12866 

and, therefore, OMB reviewed this final 

rule. A cost benefit assessment of this 

rule is summarized below and is 

available from the contact listed above. 

Cost Benefit Analysis 

FSA analyzed payment records for FY 

2007; as a result FSA categorized 

approximately $2 million in FY 2007 

payments issued to the deceased as 

payments that were ‘‘issued in error,’’ 

but that were legitimate payments that 

would have been made correctly if 

paperwork had been updated. The 

‘‘issued in error’’ categorization includes 

the instances where FSA was not 

informed of the original direct or 

indirect payment recipient’s death. The 

FY 2007 analysis found no instances of 

use of identification numbers of 

deceased farmers to collect payments 

fraudulently, though the possibility 

remains that analysis of later years’ 

results as they become available might 

uncover some such instances. These 

initial results suggest that FSA’s 

institution of ongoing cross referencing 

of SSA data on the deceased and FSA 

payment records may result in some 

monetary recoveries for the 

Government, perhaps on the order of $1 

million annually or less. The annual 

cost of acquiring SSA data on the 

deceased is just $6,000, but the cost of 

the time field staff dedicated to 

analyzing the reports could offset any 

amounts recovered. The largest benefit 

from the procedures clarified in this 

regulation will be FSA’s enhanced 

ability to ensure that payments are being 

distributed in accordance with all laws 

and regulations. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This rule is not subject to the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act since FSA is 

not required to publish a notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this rule. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81835 

Environmental Review 

The environmental impacts of this 

rule have been considered in a manner 

consistent with the provisions of the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321–4347), the 

regulations of the Council on 

Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 

1500–1508), and FSA regulations for 

compliance with NEPA (7 CFR part 

799). The changes in this rule to the 

eligibility requirements for deceased 

producers, required by the 2008 Farm 

Bill, that are identified in this final rule, 

are solely administrative. Therefore, 

FSA has determined that NEPA does not 

apply to this final rule and no 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement will be 

prepared. 

Executive Order 12372 

This program is not subject to 

Executive Order 12372, which requires 

consultation with State and local 

officials. See the notice related to 7 CFR 

part 3015, subpart V, published in the 

Federal Register on June 24, 1983 (48 

FR 29115). 

Executive Order 12988 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988. This rule is not 

retroactive and it does not preempt State 

or local laws, regulations, or policies 

unless they present an irreconcilable 

conflict with this rule. Before any 

judicial action may be brought regarding 

the provisions of this rule the 

administrative appeal provisions of 7 

CFR parts 11 and 780 must be 

exhausted. 

Executive Order 13132 

The policies contained in this rule do 

not have any substantial direct effect on 

States, on the relationship between the 

Federal government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Nor does this rule 

impose substantial direct compliance 

costs on State and local governments. 

Therefore, consultation with the states 

is not required. 

Executive Order 13175 

This rule has been reviewed for 

compliance with Executive Order 

13175, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments.’’ This 

Executive Order imposes requirements 

on the development of regulatory 

policies that have tribal implications or 

preempt tribal laws. The policies 

contained in this rule do not preempt 

Tribal law. This rule was included in 

the October through December, 2010, 

Joint Regional Consultation Strategy 

facilitated by USDA that consolidated 

consultation efforts of 70 rules from the 

2008 Farm Bill. USDA sent senior level 

agency staff to seven regional locations 

and consulted with Tribal leadership in 

each region on the rules. When the 

consultation process is complete, USDA 

will analyze the feedback and then 

incorporate any required changes into 

the regulations. 

Unfunded Mandates 

This rule contains no Federal 

mandates under the regulatory 

provisions of Title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 

for State, local, and Tribal governments 

or the private sector. In addition, CCC 

was not required to publish a notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this rule. 

Therefore, this rule is not subject to the 

requirements of sections 202 and 205 of 

UMRA. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

In general, any rule designated by 

OMB under Executive Order 12866 as 

economically significant is also a major 

rule. As noted above, OMB designated 

this rule as significant, but not 

economically significant. As a result, 

this rule is not considered a major rule 

under SBREFA. Therefore, FSA is not 

required to delay the effective date for 

60 days from the date of publication to 

allow for Congressional review and this 

rule is effective on the date of 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The regulations in this rule are 

exempt from the requirements of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

chapter 35), as specified in section 

1601(c)(2) of the 2008 Farm Bill, which 

provides that these regulations be 

promulgated and administered without 

regard to the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

E-Government Act Compliance 

CCC is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the Internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 707 

Agriculture, Grant programs— 

agriculture, Loan programs—agriculture, 

Price support programs. 

■ For the reasons discussed above, this 

rule amends 7 CFR part 707 as follows: 

PART 707—PAYMENTS DUE 

PERSONS WHO HAVE DIED, 

DISAPPEARED, OR HAVE BEEN 

DECLARED INCOMPETENT 

■ 1. Revise the authority citation for part 

707 to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1385 and 8786. 

■ 2. Amend § 707.3 by revising 

paragraph (a) introductory text, to read 

as set forth below: 

§ 707.3 Death. 

(a) Where any person who would 

otherwise be eligible to receive a 

payment dies before the payment is 

received, payment may be released in 

accordance with this section so long as, 

and only if, a timely program 

application has been filed by the 

deceased before the death or filed in a 

timely way before or after the death by 

a person legally authorized to act for the 

deceased. Timeliness will be 

determined under the relevant program 

regulations. All program conditions for 

payment under the relevant program 

regulations must have been met for the 

deceased to be considered otherwise 

eligible for the payment. However, the 

payment will not be made under this 

section unless, in addition, a separate 

release application is filed in 

accordance with § 707.7. If these 

conditions are met, payment may be 

released without regard to the claims of 

creditors other than the United States, 

in accordance with the following order 

of precedence: 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 707.4 by revising 

paragraph (a) introductory text, to read 

as set forth below: 

§ 707.4 Disappearance. 

(a) Where any person who would 

otherwise be eligible to receive a 

payment disappears before the payment 

is received, payment may be released in 

accordance with this section so long as, 

and only if, a timely program 

application has been filed by that 

person before the disappearance or filed 

timely before or after the disappearance 

by someone legally authorized to act for 

the person involved. Timeliness will be 

determined under the relevant program 

regulations. All program conditions for 

payment under the relevant program 

regulations must have been met for the 

person involved to be considered 

otherwise eligible for the payment. 

However, the payment will not be made 

unless, in addition, a separate release 

application is filed in accordance with 

§ 707.7. If these conditions are met, 

payment may be released without regard 

to the claims of creditors other than the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
81836 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

United States, in accordance with the 

following order of precedence: 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Revise § 707.5 to read as set forth 

below: 

§ 707.5 Incompetency. 

(a) Where any person who would 

otherwise be eligible to receive a 

payment is adjudged incompetent by a 

court of competent jurisdiction before 

the payment is received, payment may 

be released in accordance with this 

section so long as, and only if, a timely 

and binding program application has 

been filed by the person involved while 

capable or by someone legally 

authorized to file an application for the 

person involved. Timeliness is 

determined under the relevant program 

regulations. In all cases, the payment 

application must have been timely 

under the relevant program regulations 

and all program conditions for payment 

must have been met by or on behalf of 

the person involved. However, the 

payment will not be made unless, in 

addition, a separate release application 

is filed in accordance with § 707.7. If 

these conditions are met, payment may 

be released without regard to the claims 

of creditors other than the United States, 

to the guardian or committee legally 

appointed for the person involved. In 

case no guardian or committee had been 

appointed, payment, if for not more 

than $1,000, may be released without 

regard to claims of creditors other than 

the United States, to one of the 

following in the following order for the 

benefit of the person who was the 

subject of the adjudication: 

(1) The spouse. 

(2) An adult son, daughter, or 

grandchild. 

(3) The mother or father. 

(4) An adult brother or sister. 

(5) Such person as may be authorized 

under State law to receive payment for 

the person (see standard procedure 

prescribed for the respective region). 

(b) In case payment is more than 

$1,000, payment may be released only 

to such person as may be authorized 

under State law to receive payment for 

the incompetent, so long as all 

conditions for other payments specified 

in paragraph (a) of this section and 

elsewhere in the applicable regulations 

have been met. Those requirements 

include the filing of a proper and timely 

and legally authorized program 

application by or for the person 

adjudged incompetent. The release of 

funds under this paragraph will be 

made without regard to claims of 

creditors other than the United States 

unless the agency determines otherwise. 

§ 707.6 [Amended] 

■ 5. Amend § 707.6 by removing the 

words ‘‘apply for a payment’’ and 

adding, in their place, the words ‘‘apply 

for a release of a payment’’. 

■ 6. Amend § 707.7 as follows: 

■ a. Revise the heading to read as set 

forth below, and 

■ b. Remove the first sentence and add 

in its place the seven sentences set forth 

below. 

§ 707.7 Release application. 

No payment may be made under this 

part unless a proper program 

application was filed in accordance 

with the rules for the program that 

generated the payment. That application 

must have been timely and filed by 

someone legally authorized to act for the 

deceased, disappeared, or declaredincompetent person. The filer can be the 

party that earned the payment 

themselves—such as the case of a 

person who filed a program application 

before they died—or someone legally 

authorized to act for the party that 

earned the payment. All program 

conditions for payment must have been 

met before the death, disappearance, or 

incompetency except for the timely 

filing of the application for payment by 

the person legally authorized to act for 

the party earning the payment. But, 

further, for the payment to be released 

under the rules of this part, a second 

application must be filed. That second 

application is a release application filed 

under this section. In particular, as to 

the latter, where all other conditions 

have been met, persons desiring to 

claim payment for themselves or an 

estate in accordance with this part 707 

must do so by filing a release 

application on Form FSA–325, 

‘‘Application for Payment of Amounts 

Due Persons Who Have Died, 

Disappeared or Have Been Declared 

Incompetent.’’ * * * 

Signed in Washington, DC, on December 

22, 2010. 

Jonathan W. Coppess, 

Administrator, Farm Service Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32760 Filed 12–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–05–P 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

12 CFR Part 226 

[Regulation Z; Docket No. R–1366] 

Truth in Lending 

AGENCY: Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System. 

ACTION: Interim rule; request for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: The Board is publishing for 

comment an interim rule amending 

Regulation Z, which implements the 

Truth in Lending Act (TILA). This 

interim rule revises the Board’s interim 

rule published on September 24, 2010, 

which implemented certain 

requirements of the Mortgage Disclosure 

Improvement Act of 2008. The 

September 2010 interim rule requires 

creditors who extend consumer credit 

secured by real property or a dwelling 

to disclose summary information about 

interest rates and payment changes in a 

tabular format. The Board is issuing this 

interim rule to clarify certain provisions 

of the September 2010 interim rule. 

Specifically, this rule clarifies the 

requirements for adjustable-rate 

transactions that are ‘‘5/1 ARM’’ loans. It 

corrects the requirements for interestonly loans to clarify that the disclosures 

should reflect the date of the interest 

rate change rather than the date the first 

payment is due under the new rate. This 

interim rule also revises the definition 

of ‘‘negative amortization loans’’ to 

clarify which transactions are covered 

by the special disclosure requirements 

for such loans. 

DATES: This interim rule is effective 

January 30, 2011. Compliance with its 

provisions is optional, however, for 

transactions for which an application 

for credit is received by the creditor 

before October 1, 2011. This interim 

rule does not change the January 30, 

2011 mandatory compliance date of the 

September 2010 interim rule. Comments 

on this interim rule must be received on 

or before February 28, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. R–1366, by any 

of the following methods: 

• Agency Web Site: http:// 

www.federalreserve.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments at 

http://www.federalreserve.gov/ 

generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: 

regs.comments@federalreserve.gov. 

Include the docket number in the 

subject line of the message. 

• Fax: (202) 452–3819 or (202) 452– 

3102. 

• Mail: Address to Jennifer J. Johnson, 

Secretary, Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20551. 

All public comments will be made 

available on the Board’s Web site at 

http://www.federalreserve.gov/ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES