55142 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 205 / Thursday, October 23, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Dated: October 15, 1997.

Yvette S. Jackson,

Acting Administrator, Food and Consumer

Service.

[FR Doc. 97–28062 Filed 10–22–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–30–U

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food and Consumer Service

7 CFR Part 247

RIN 0584–AC60

Commodity Supplemental Food

Program—Caseload Assignment

AGENCY: Food and Consumer Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: This direct final rule amends

provisions of the Commodity

Supplemental Food Program

Regulations to provide for the allocation

of a single caseload to State agencies

each year, instead of the allocation of

two separate caseloads, one for women,

infants, and children, and one for the

elderly. This rule will permit State

agencies, and the local agencies with

which they have signed agreements, to

utilize this single caseload to serve lowincome women, infants, and children

and elderly populations as needed,

provided they give priority in service to

women, infants, and children over the

elderly. This rule will also streamline

and simplify program management at

the State and local level.

DATES: This rule will become effective

on December 8, 1997, unless the

Department receives written adverse

comments or notices of intent to submit

adverse comments postmarked on or

before November 24, 1997. If adverse

comments within the scope of this

rulemaking are received, the

Department will publish timely

notification of withdrawal of this rule in

the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to

Lillie Ragan, Assistant Branch Chief,

Household Programs Branch, Food

Distribution Division, Food and

Consumer Service, U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Park Office Center, Room

502, 3101 Park Center Drive,

Alexandria, VA 22302–1594. Comments

in response to this rule may be

inspected at 3101 Park Center Drive,

Room 502, Alexandria, Virginia during

normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5

p.m., Mondays through Fridays).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lillie Ragan at the above address or

telephone (703) 305–2662.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Order 12866

This direct final rule has been

determined to be not significant for

purposes of Executive Order 12866, and,

therefore, has not been reviewed by the

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This action has been reviewed with

regard to the requirements of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.

601–612). The Administrator of the

Food and Consumer Service (FCS) has

certified that this action will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

While procedures in this rulemaking

will affect State and local agencies that

administer the Commodity

Supplemental Food Program, any

economic effect will not be significant.

Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995

Title II of the Unfunded Mandate

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for

Federal agencies to assess the effects of

their regulatory actions on State, local,

and tribal governments and the private

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,

FCS generally must prepare a written

statement, including a cost-benefit

analysis, for proposed and final rules

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may

result in expenditures to State, local, or

tribal governments, in the aggregate, or

to the private sector, of $100 million or

more in any one year. When such a

statement is needed for a rule, section

205 of the UMRA generally requires FCS

to identify and consider a reasonable

number of regulatory alternatives and

adopt the least costly, more costeffective or lease burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule.

This rule contains no Federal

mandates (under the regulatory

provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for

State, local, and tribal governments or

the private sector of $100 million or

more in any one year. Thus, this direct

final rule is not subject to the

requirements of sections 202 and 205 of

the UMRA.

Executive Order 12372

This program is listed in the Catalog

of Federal Domestic Assistance under

10.565, and is subject to the provisions

of Executive Order 12372, which

requires intergovernmental consultation

with State and local officials (7 CFR part

3015, Subpart V and final rule-related

notices published at 48 FR 29114, June

24, 1983 and 49 FR 22676, May 31,

1984).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This final rule reflects no new

information collection requirements

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507). The existing

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements for 7 CFR part 247, which

were approved by OMB under control

number 0584–0293, will not change as

a result of this final rule.

Executive Order 12988

This direct final rule has been

reviewed under Executive Order 12988,

Civil Justice Reform. This rule is

intended to have preemptive effect with

respect to any State or local laws,

regulations, or policies which conflict

with its provisions or which would

otherwise impede its full

implementation. This rule is not

intended to have retroactive effect

unless so specified in the EFFECTIVE

DATE section of the preamble. There are

no administrative procedures which

must be exhausted prior to any judicial

challenge to the provisions of this rule

or the application of its provisions.

Background

The primary purpose of the

Commodity Supplemental Food

Program (CSFP) is to provide nutritious

commodities and nutrition education to

low-income pregnant, postpartum, and

breastfeeding women, infants, and

children up to the age of six, to help

meet their dietary needs at a critical life

stage of growth and development. This

has been the program’s basic goal since

the initiation of a ‘‘supplemental food

program’’ for pregnant and breastfeeding

women and infants in 1968, utilizing

funds appropriated for child feeding

programs, and its subsequent

designation as the ‘‘Commodity

Supplemental Food Program’’ in the

Food and Agriculture Act of 1977 (Pub.

L. 95–113), which added sections 4 and

5 to the Agriculture and Consumer

Protection Act of 1973 (Pub. L. 93–86).

However, legislation expanded the

eligible population in 1981 and 1982 to

include elderly persons under a pilot

project. With the passage of the Food

Security Act of 1985 (Pub. L. 99–198)

authority to provide program benefits to

the low-income elderly was extended to

all State agencies that had resources

remaining after providing benefits to all

eligible applicant women, infants, and

children. Thus, while women, infants,

and children retained priority in

service, the elderly were established as

a second eligible population group in

the program. This requirement is found
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 205 / Thursday, October 23, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 55143

in section 5(g) of the Agriculture and

Consumer Protection Act of 1983

(7U.S.C. 612c note).

The Special Supplemental Nutrition

Program for Women, Infants, and

Children (WIC) also provides benefits

(in the form of food vouchers) to

pregnant, breastfeeding, and postpartum

women, infants and children, with

modest differences in categorical

eligibility requirements from CSFP. In

WIC, women are eligible up to six

months postpartum, compared to 12

months in CSFP; and children are

eligible up to five years of age in WIC,

and up to six years in CSFP. WIC

participation increased significantly

during the period 1988–1996, from 3.6

million to approximately 7.2 million—

an average increase of 450,000 per year.

The increased scope of the WIC Program

contributed to a decline in participation

of women, infants, and children in

CSFP, as persons eligible for both

programs may only participate in one of

them. From 1993 to 1996, participation

of women, infants, and children in

CSFP declined by 40 percent, while

elderly participation in that period

increased by 35.4 percent. By fiscal year

1996, elderly participation in CSFP

averaged 219,281 per month, or 61.5

percent of total program participation.

Resources are allocated to

participating State agencies in CSFP in

the form of caseload, which is the

monthly average number of participants

a State agency is authorized to serve

over a specified 12-month period (the

caseload cycle). State agencies’ caseload

allocations each year are based on

program participation from the previous

year, and requests to expand the

program. In implementing the authority

to serve elderly pursuant to the Food

Security Act of 1985, the Department

provided, through program regulations,

for the assignment of an elderly

caseload to State agencies, separate from

the assignment of the women, infants,

and children caseload. While State

agencies may not serve more elderly

persons than their assigned elderly

caseload level, they may request a

conversion of caseload slots for women,

infants, and children that are unutilized

during the caseload cycle to service for

the elderly, if State agencies have more

elderly applicants seeking program

benefits. As evidence that the

conversion request will not restrict the

participation of women, infants and

children, State agencies may include

evidence of outreach efforts conducted

by the State and/or local agency to

promote and facilitate service to eligible

women, infants, and children in the

service area. To further ensure that this

priority group is adequately served,

current regulations do not permit

submission of caseload conversion

requests until 90 days after the

assignment of caseload.

Allocation of separate caseloads for

the two population groups served in

CSFP, and the caseload conversion

requirement, serve the purpose of

protecting program resources for

women, infants, and children, while

allowing unused resources to be

redirected for use by the elderly.

However, with the decline in

participation of women, infants, and

children, and the increased

participation of the elderly in CSFP, the

caseload restrictions, and caseload

conversion requirement, have become

obstacles to the efficient use of program

resources to serve States’ needy

populations. Until caseload conversion

requests can be made, and acted upon,

caseload slots allocated to State agencies

for women, infants, and children may

remain unused. State and local agencies

need more flexibility in caseload

management to allow them to fill

caseload slots throughout the caseload

cycle.

In order to provide State agencies

with greater flexibility in caseload

management, this direct final rule

amends regulatory requirements in part

247 to assign participating State

agencies a single caseload, instead of

separate women-infants-children, and

elderly, caseloads. Local agencies

within States may serve women, infants,

and children, and the elderly, on a firstcome, first-served basis, up to the single

caseload limit assigned to them by the

State agency, but must continue to meet

the priority requirements in

§ 247.7(b)(2)—i.e., if eligible women,

infants, and children are waiting to be

served, the next available caseload slots

must be utilized to serve them.

The Department will continue to

transform all funds available for CSFP

commodity purchases each year into

caseload, and to allocate all available

caseload among the State agencies.

Procedures for establishing total

available caseload are not governed by

legislation or regulations and will be

modified only to the minor extent

necessary to reflect the shift from two

caseloads to one. In accordance with

sections 5(a) and (1) of the Agriculture

and Consumer Protection Act of 1973,

the Department will make 20 percent of

the annual appropriation and 20 percent

of any unspent food funds carried over

from the previous year available to State

agencies in the form of administrative

funds. The Department will convert

remaining funds to caseload based on

estimates of the percentage of total

participation to be accounted for by

each subgroup—e.g., pregnant and

breastfeeding women, the elderly—and

projections of the average cost of foods

to be taken by participants in each

subgroup. These data will be used to

compute a single, blended average cost

of food per participant per year, and that

cost will be divided into available food

funds to yield total CSFP caseload.

The amendments to the regulatory

requirements addressing caseload

assignment and the State plan of

operation are discussed in more detail

below. The Department invites

comments only on the regulatory

amendments in this rulemaking, which

establish a single caseload for the

program, and not on any other sections

of program regulations. The Department

considers the regulatory amendments in

this direct final rule to be

noncontroversial and unlikely to elicit

adverse comments. In order for the

Department to issue CSFP caseload by

the December 1, 1997 deadline, as

required by § 247.10(a), this rule will be

effective on December 8, 1997, rather

than on a date conforming with the 60-

day time period generally provided to

effectuate direct final rules.

Caseload Assignment

Section 247.10 of the current

regulations describes the procedures for

assigning caseload to State agencies

each year, the procedures and

restrictions for requesting caseload

conversion, and the use of elderly

caseload to serve women, infants, and

children. The transition to a single

caseload assignment in this final rule

requires the revision of paragraph (a)(2)

of this section, which addresses the

specific order and manner in which

caseload assignments are made, and the

removal of paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), and

(a)(5) of this section, which address

caseload conversion—not necessary in a

single caseload system—and the use of

elderly caseload slots. As part of the

amendment of paragraph (a)(2), the

method for assigning caseload to State

agencies requesting expansion of service

to women, infants, and children is

revised. The present assignment of

expansion caseload to State agencies

based on their capacity to serve their

categorically eligible women, infants,

and children in WIC and CSFP is overly

complicated, and no longer necessary,

as the expansion of the WIC Program

has resulted in a much more extensive

coverage of the target population.

Furthermore, reliable data on this

capacity are no longer available. Hence,

the Department is revising this method

to bring it into conformance with the

means of addressing expansion requests

for the elderly.
55144 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 205 / Thursday, October 23, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Additionally, all references to

caseload cycles beginning on specific

dates are removed, since these cycles

have long since passed.

In assigning caseload, the Department

will continue to attach a higher priority

to requests to expand service for

women, infants, and children over

requests to expand service for the

elderly. Although State agencies will

always be allocated caseload that is not

designated for use by a particular

population group, if they request

expansion caseload to serve additional

women, infants, and children, they will

be expected to promote and facilitate

use of such caseload for the intended

purpose, for example, by assigning the

caseload to areas where women, infants,

and children are underserved by the

WIC Program, and by intensifying

outreach efforts to this population group

in areas where the additional caseload

is assigned. In States which currently do

not operate the program, requests for

initiation of program service to women,

infants, and children will likewise be

considered ahead of requests to initiate

service to the elderly.

Below, the primary features of each of

the steps in the current order of

caseload assignment, as delineated in

§ 247.10(a)(2), are described, together

with any changes that this rulemaking

makes to that step. As at present,

caseload assignment will proceed

through as many of the steps in the

process as available resources permit.

Under paragraph (a)(2)(i), State

agencies receive caseload for the three

elderly pilot projects in Detroit, New

Orleans, and Des Moines, equal to

December 1985 levels. This remains

unchanged.

Under paragraph (a)(2)(ii), currently

participating State agencies receive

caseload, first for women, infants, and

children, and then for elderly persons,

based on participation in one of three

time periods in the previous year, but

not to exceed the caseload allocations

for each of these two groups in the

preceding caseload cycle. This step is

revised to assign to currently

participating State agencies a single

caseload based on total participation of

women, infants, and children, and the

elderly in one of the three time periods

in the previous year, but not to exceed

total caseload assigned to State agencies

in the preceding caseload cycle. As at

present, State agencies entering their

second caseload cycle of program

service will receive caseload equal to

the level assigned for their first cycle of

program service, and not in accordance

with first-year participation levels.

However, the distinction between

women, infants, and children, and

elderly caseload will cease to be made.

Under paragraph (a)(2)(iii), requests

from currently participating State

agencies for expansion caseload for

women, infants, and children are

considered. As delineated in paragraph

(a)(2)(iii)(A), a State’s participation level

for this group must equal 90 percent of

assigned caseload for any of three time

periods in the previous year in order for

the State to be considered for expansion

caseload. If the State meets this

criterion, expansion caseload is

assigned based on the State’s capacity to

serve its categorically eligible women,

infants, and children in WIC and CSFP,

and in an amount that will increase the

number of this population served in the

State to a specific level, as delineated in

paragraphs (a)(2)(iii) (B) and (C). First,

this rulemaking revises paragraph (iii) to

add a new sentence stating that

expansion requests to increase service to

women, infants, and children will

receive priority over expansion requests

to increase service to the elderly, in

accordance with program priorities

established in § 247.7(b)(2). Second, a

revised § 247.10(a)(2)(iii)(A) addresses

expansion requests for either women,

infants, and children, or the elderly,

utilizing the 90 percent participation

requirement for both populations

together. Finally, paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(B)

is revised to address expansion requests

for service to women, infants, and

children in the same manner as

presently utilized for fulfilling

expansion requests for the elderly: i.e.,

each State agency requesting expansion

caseload for women, infants, and

children will receive an equal share of

the available caseload, or the amount

that FCS determines the State agency

needs and can effectively manage,

whichever is less. A new paragraph

(a)(2)(iii)(C) addresses the distribution

of caseload for expanded service to the

elderly, which is unchanged from the

present procedure, as currently

described in paragraph (a)(2)(iv)(B).

Under paragraph (a)(2)(iv), requests

from currently participating State

agencies to initiate or expand service to

the elderly are considered. As

delineated in paragraph (a)(2)(iv)(A), a

State’s participation level for this group

must equal 90 percent of assigned

caseload for any of three time periods in

the previous year, in order to be

considered for expansion caseload. If

State agencies meet this criterion,

expansion caseload is assigned in equal

amounts to State agencies, or in

amounts that FCS determines that State

agencies need and can effectively

manage, whichever is less, as delineated

in paragraph (a)(2)(iv)(B). Paragraph

(a)(2)(iv)(C) states that, if State agencies’

shares exceed their approved requests,

the excess amount is redistributed

among State agencies whose allocations

did not meet their approved requests.

This rulemaking removes paragraph

(a)(2)(iv), since the revised paragraph

(a)(2)(iii) establishes uniform

procedures which cover expansion

requests for the elderly, as well as

women, infants, and children.

Under paragraph (a)(2)(v), requests

from State agencies to initiate service to

women, infants, and children (i.e., those

States not presently participating in

CSFP), are considered, and caseload

assigned. Paragraph (a)(2)(v)(A) utilizes

the same means of determining a State

agencies’ capacity to serve its

potentially eligible women, infants, and

children, and for assigning caseload

based on this determination, as

described in paragraphs (a)(2)(iii) (B)

and (C). State agencies may not request

to serve the elderly in their initial year

of service; if they wish to serve the

elderly, they must wait for the following

caseload cycle, as described in

paragraph (a)(4) of this section, which,

as previously mentioned, is removed.

This rulemaking redesignates paragraph

(a)(2)(v) as (a)(2)(iv), and revises it to

address requests to initiate service to

elderly persons, as well as women,

infants, and children. A new sentence is

added stating that requests to initiate

service to women, infants, and children

shall receive priority over requests to

initiate service to the elderly, in

accordance with program priorities

established in § 247.7(b)(2). Section

247.10(a)(2)(v)(A) is revised to utilize

the same means of caseload assignment

described above in revised paragraphs

(a)(2)(iii) (B) and (C).

Subparagraph (B) is removed. State

agencies are no longer restricted to

serving only women, infants, and

children in their first year of operations.

Section 247.24, which refers to

temporary caseload assignment

procedures that were applied to a

previous caseload cycle, is removed, as

these procedures are no longer relevant.

State Plan of Operation

In accordance with § 247.5, before the

beginning of the fiscal year, State

agencies submit to FCS a plan

describing the means by which the

program will be operated and

administered. Included in the

information that State agencies must

submit, which is detailed in this

section, are caseload conversion

requests, plans for caseload utilization,

outreach activities, and documentation

of data supporting requests to serve the

elderly. Revisions to the regulatory
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 205 / Thursday, October 23, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 55145

requirements for the submission of this

information in the State plan are

described below.

Currently, under § 247.5, State agency

requests to convert unfilled women,

infants, and children caseload slots to

serve the elderly are made during the

fiscal year as an amendment to the State

plan, and must include documentation

supporting the need for elderly service

in the proposed service area, and

assurances that caseload conversion

may be accomplished without

restricting service to women, infants,

and children in the service area. The

assignment of a single caseload to State

agencies, in this rule, makes caseload

conversion, and the attendant

documentation, unnecessary. Hence,

language in the introductory text of

§ 247.5, and paragraph (a)(16) of that

section addressing caseload conversion,

its timing, scope, and attendant

documentation, are removed.

Section 247.5(a)(4), which addresses a

description of plans for conducting

outreach to reach maximum caseload, is

amended to define the objective of

outreach activities as ensuring that

women, infants, children, and elderly

persons are aware of program benefits,

without the present language referring

to reaching maximum caseload. Since,

by this rulemaking, caseload may be

utilized to serve either population

group, it is important to specify the two

population groups that should be

targeted in outreach activities. In

addition, although reaching maximum

caseload is an objective that this

rulemaking is designed to help State

agencies achieve, it is not a regulatory

requirement, as current language

implies.

Section 247.5(a)(15) currently requires

that State agencies wishing to serve the

elderly provide documentation, as part

of the State plan, describing the extent

of need for elderly service in the

proposed service area. Since this rule is

intended to provide State agencies with

the flexibility to utilize a single assigned

caseload to serve their needy elderly

without the need to request caseload

conversion or provide attendant

documentation, this section is amended

to require such documentation only of

State agencies wishing to initiate service

to the elderly, or requesting expansion

caseload to serve the elderly.

Additionally, paragraph (a)(15)(i) is

revised to remove the requirement that

demographic statistics be included as

part of the supporting documentation.

Lastly, the language in paragraph

(a)(15)(ii) concerning descriptions of

how a State agency will meet the needs

of homebound elderly is clarified,

without changing its meaning.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 247

Agricultural commodities, Food

assistance programs, Infants and

children, Maternal and child health,

Public assistance programs, nutrition,

women, aged.

Accordingly, 7 CFR Part 247 is

amended as follows.

PART 247—COMMODITY

SUPPLEMENTAL FOOD PROGRAM

1. The authority citation for part 247

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 5, Pub.L. 93–86, 87 Stat.

249, as added by sec. 1304(b)(2), Pub.L. 95–

113, 91 Stat. 980 (7 U.S.C. 612c note); sec.

1335, Pub.L. 97–98, 95 Stat. 1293 (7 U.S.C.

612c note); sec. 209, Pub.L. 98–8, 97 Stat. 35

(7 U.S.C. 612c note); sec. 2(8), Pub.L. 98–92,

97 Stat. 611 (7 U.S.C. 612c note); sec. 1562,

Pub.L. 99–198, 99 Stat. 1590 (7 U.S.C. 612c

note); sec. 101(k), Pub.L. 100–202; sec.

1771(a), Pub.L 101–624, 101 Stat. 3806 (7

U.S.C. 612c note); sec. 402(a), Pub.L. 104–

127, 110 Stat. 1028 (7 U.S.C. 612c note).

2. In § 247.5:

a. The fifth, sixth, and seventh

sentences of the introductory text of

paragraph (a) are removed;

b. Paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(15) are

revised;

c. Paragraph (a)(16) is removed.

The revisions read as follows:

§ 247.5 State agency plan of program

operation and administration.

(a) * * *

(4) A description of any plans for

conducting outreach to ensure that all

women, infants, and children, and

elderly persons are aware of program

benefits.

* * * * *

(15) If a State agency wishes to initiate

service to the elderly, or request

expansion caseload to serve the elderly,

a description of plans for providing

program benefits to elderly persons

within the State during the caseload

cycle. Such description shall include—

(i) An identification of the elderly

population to be served, including

documentation of the extent of need in

the proposed service area; and

(ii) A description of the means by

which the State agency will meet the

needs of the homebound elderly.

* * * * *

3. In § 247.10:

a. Paragraph (a)(2) is revised;

b. Paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), and (a)(5)

are removed.

The revision reads as follows:

§ 247.10. Caseload assignment and

administrative funding.

(a) * * *

(2) To the extent that funds are

available, FCS shall assign caseload to

State agencies in the following order.

(i) State agencies for the three elderly

feeding projects in Detroit, New

Orleans, and Des Moines shall be

assigned caseload equal to the level of

participation for each project in

December 1985.

(ii) Currently participating State

agencies, except those entering their

second cycle of program service, shall

receive caseload in amounts equal to the

greatest of their total participation of

women, infants, and children, and

elderly persons (except for caseload

equal to the December 1985 level of

participation at the three elderly feeding

projects) during September, or monthly

average participation for the period July

through September, or for the prior

fiscal year; provided, however, that a

State agency shall not receive caseload

under this paragraph in excess of

caseload assigned for the preceding

caseload cycle. State agencies entering

their second caseload cycle of program

service shall receive caseload equal to

the caseload level assigned for their first

cycle of program service.

(iii) Requests from currently

participating State agencies to expand

service to women, infants, and children,

and the elderly, shall be addressed in

the following manner. Expansion

requests to increase service to women,

infants, and children shall receive

priority over expansion requests to

increase service to the elderly.

(A) State agencies shall be eligible to

receive expansion caseload only if,

during the preceding September, the

period July through September, or the

prior fiscal year, their monthly average

participation equaled at least 90 percent

of their assigned caseload level for the

preceding caseload cycle.

(B) State agencies requesting

expansion caseload to increase service

to women, infants, and children shall be

assigned the lesser of an equal share of

available caseload or the amount of

expansion caseload FCS has determined

that the State agency needs and can

effectively manage. If any State

agencies’ shares exceed their approved

requests, the excess caseload shall be

divided equally among State agencies

whose approved requests exceed their

shares.

(C) State agencies requesting

expansion caseload to increase service

to the elderly shall be assigned the

lesser of an equal share of available

caseload or the amount of expansion

caseload FCS has determined that the

State agency needs and can effectively

manage. If any State agencies’ shares

exceed their approved requests, the
55146 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 205 / Thursday, October 23, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

excess caseload shall be divided equally

among State agencies whose approved

requests exceed their shares.

(iv) Requests from State agencies to

initiate program service for women,

infants, and children, and the elderly

shall be addressed in the following

manner. Requests to initiate service to

women, infants, and children shall

receive priority over requests to initiate

service to the elderly.

(A) State agencies with approved

State plans incorporating requests for

program initiation to provide service to

women, infants, and children shall be

assigned caseload in the same manner

described in paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(B) of

this section.

(B) State agencies with approved State

plans incorporating requests for

program initiation to provide service to

the elderly shall be assigned caseload in

the same manner described in paragraph

(a)(2)(iii)(C) of this section.

* * * * *

§ 247.24 [Removed]

4. Section 247.24 is removed.

Dated: October 15, 1997.

Yvette S. Jackson,

Acting Administrator, Food and Consumer

Service.

[FR Doc. 97–28060 Filed 10–22–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–30–U

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 930

[Docket No. FV97–930–1 IFR]

Tart Cherries Grown in the States of

Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania,

Oregon, Utah, Washington, and

Wisconsin; Assessment Rate and

Establishment of Late Payment and

Interest Charges on Delinquent

Assessments

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Interim final rule with request

for comments.

SUMMARY: This interim final rule

establishes an assessment rate for the

1997–98 and subsequent fiscal periods

to cover expenses incurred by the

Cherry Industry Administrative Board

(Board) under Marketing Order No. 930.

This rule also establishes an interest rate

and late payment charge on delinquent

assessments owed by handlers under

the tart cherry marketing order. The

Board is responsible for local

administration of the marketing order.

Authorization to assess tart cherry

handlers will enable the Board to incur

expenses that are reasonable and

necessary to administer the program.

The interest rate and late payment

charges will contribute to the efficient

operation of the program by ensuring

adequate funds are available to cover

budgeted expenses incurred under the

marketing order. The 1997–98 fiscal

period covers the period July 1, through

June 30.

DATES: Effective on October 24, 1997.

Comments received by December 22,

1997 will be considered prior to

issuance of a final rule.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are

invited to submit written comments

concerning this rule. Comments must be

sent in triplicate to the Docket Clerk,

Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS,

USDA, room 2525–S, P.O. Box 96456,

Washington, DC 20090–6456; Fax: (202)

720–5698. All comments should

reference the docket number and the

date and page number of this issue of

the Federal Register and will be made

available for public inspection in the

Office of the Docket Clerk during regular

business hours.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patricia A. Petrella, Marketing

Specialist, and Kenneth G. Johnson,

Regional Manager, DC Marketing Field

Office, Marketing Order Administration

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division,

AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room

2525–S, Washington, DC 20090–6456;

telephone (202) 720–2491, Fax (202)

720–5698. Small businesses may request

information on compliance with this

regulation by contacting Jay Guerber,

Marketing Order Administration

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division,

AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room

2525–S, Washington, DC 20090–6456;

telephone (202) 720–2491; Fax (202)

720–5698.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule

is issued under Marketing Agreement

and Order No. 930 (7 CFR part 930),

regulating the handling of tart cherries

grown in the States of Michigan, New

York, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Utah,

Washington, and Wisconsin, hereinafter

referred to as the ‘‘order.’’ The

marketing agreement and order are

effective under the Agricultural

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as

amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter

referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’

The Department of Agriculture

(Department) is issuing this rule in

conformance with Executive Order

12866.

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform. Under the marketing order now

in effect, tart cherry handlers are subject

to assessments. Funds to administer the

order are derived from such

assessments. It is intended that the

assessment rate as issued herein will be

applicable to all assessable tart cherries

beginning July 1, 1997, and continuing

until amended, suspended, or

terminated. This rule will not preempt

any State or local laws, regulations, or

policies, unless they present an

irreconcilable conflict with this rule.

The Act provides that administrative

proceedings must be exhausted before

parties may file suit in court. Under

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any

handler subject to an order may file

with the Secretary a petition stating that

the order, any provision of the order, or

any obligation imposed in connection

with the order is not in accordance with

law and request a modification of the

order or to be exempted therefrom. Such

handler is afforded the opportunity for

a hearing on the petition. After the

hearing the Secretary would rule on the

petition. The Act provides that the

district court of the United States in any

district in which the handler is an

inhabitant, or has his or her principal

place of business, has jurisdiction to

review the Secretary’s ruling on the

petition, provided an action is filed not

later than 20 days after the date of the

entry of the ruling.

The tart cherry marketing order in

section 930.31 provides that one of the

duties of the Board is to submit to the

Secretary a budget for each fiscal period,

prior to the beginning of such period,

including a report explaining the items

appearing therein and a

recommendation as to the rates of

assessments for such period. The

recommendations concerning the

proposed assessment rate are discussed

in a public meeting. Thus, all directly

affected persons have an opportunity to

participate and provide input.

At its meeting on January 8 and 9,

1997, the Board unanimously

recommended expenditures of

$650,000, and an assessment rate of

$0.0025 per pound of tart cherries

handled during the 1997–1998 crop year

and subsequent crop years. The

recommended expenditure figure covers

expenses for the 1997–98 fiscal period,

as well as expenses incurred in

connection with the start-up of the

program beginning on January 1, 1997,

when the first public meeting of the

newly formed Board took place. The tart

cherry marketing order became effective

on September 25, 1996. The Department

has approved the Board’s 1997–98

budget of expenses. Until assessment

income is available, the Board may

obtain funds through a lending

institution to fund Board operations.