This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

5519

Vol. 62, No. 25

Thursday, February 6, 1997

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food and Consumer Service

7 CFR Parts 210 and 226

RIN 0584–AC42

Child and Adult Care Food Program,

Improved Targeting of Day Care Home

Reimbursements; Correction and

Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Food and Consumer Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Interim rule; correction and

extension of comment period.

SUMMARY: This document contains

corrections to the preamble, regulatory

text, and economic impact analysis

(appendix) of the interim rule published

on January 7, 1997 (62 FR 889). The

interim rule contained changes required

by the Personal Responsibility and

Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of

1996 relating to the implementation of

a two-tiered reimbursement structure for

day care homes participating in the

Child and Adult Care Food Program.

The comment period is also being

extended to provide the public

sufficient opportunity to comment on

the interim rule in light of these

corrections.

DATES: Effective July 1, 1997, except for

§§ 210.9(b)(20), 210.19(f), 226.6(f)(2) and

226.6(f)(9), which are effective March

10, 1997. To be assured of

consideration, comments on the interim

rule must be postmarked on or before

May 7, 1997, except for comments on

the information collection which must

be received by March 10, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert M. Eadie, Chief, Policy and

Program Development Branch, Child

Nutrition Division, Food and Consumer

Service, Department of Agriculture,

3101 Park Center Drive, Room 1007,

Alexandria, Virginia 22302 or telephone

703–305–2620.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On January 7, 1997, the Department

published an interim rule incorporating

provisions from the Personal

Responsibility and Work Opportunity

Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–

193) concerning implementation of a

two-tiered reimbursement structure for

day care homes participating in the

Child and Adult Care Food Program

(CACFP). Under this structure, the level

of reimbursement for meals served to

enrolled children will be determined by

economic need based on: the location of

the day care home; the income of the

day care provider; or the income of

individual children’s households.

However, the interim rule as

published contains errors in the

preamble, regulatory text, and economic

impact analysis (appendix) that need

correction.

Correction of Publication

Accordingly, the publication on

January 7, 1997 at 62 FR 889 is

corrected as follows:

1. On page 898, first column, the

preamble is corrected by removing the

second full paragraph and by adding

three new paragraphs in its place to read

as follows:

The claiming percentages/blended rates

alternative set forth in section 708(e)(1) of the

Act indicates that the claiming percentage or

blended rate be established based on the

percentage of identified income-eligible

children enrolled in a home ‘‘in a specified

month or other period.’’ This interim

regulation prescribes that the claiming

percentage or blended rate be based on one

month’s data concerning the children

enrolled in a particular day care home. The

Department will allow sponsors to use either

of two approaches to making this calculation,

and is interested in receiving comments on

whether both of these alternative methods

should continue to be permitted.

The first alternative would involve the day

care home submitting an attendance list for

the specified month to the sponsor. The

sponsor would then use the attendance list

to determine the claiming percentage or

blended rate for the home based on a

weighted average of each enrolled child’s

level of participation during the month. The

second alternative would involve a sponsor

calculating the claiming percentage or

blended rate based on a home’s enrollment

for an entire month using a list of enrolled

children submitted by the day care home.

The sponsor would assess the income

eligibility status of each of the children

enrolled in the home during the month and,

using the enrollment list, derive the

appropriate claiming percentage or blended

rate. For example, if a home’s enrollment list

for the month of January indicates that 10

children were enrolled during the month, the

home’s claiming percentage or blended rate

would be based on the number of identified

income-eligible children, divided by 10.

The Department believes that either of

these methods will achieve greater accuracy

in reimbursement payments than basing the

six-month calculation on a single point in

time (that is, one day’s data, which could

misrepresent typical enrollment or

attendance in that home). Although the

attendance list may impose an additional

burden on the sponsor and day care homes,

it would certainly provide a higher level of

accuracy than using an enrollment list.

2. On page 899, third column, in the

second full paragraph, line 10, the

preamble is corrected by removing the

word ‘‘submit’’ and replacing it with the

word ‘‘collect’’.

3. On page 903, in line 1 of the second

column, § 226.13(d)(3)(ii) is corrected by

adding the words ‘‘one month’s data

concerning’’ after the words ‘‘basis of’’.

4. On page 904, third column,

§ 226.23(h)(6) is corrected by italicizing

the paragraph heading ‘‘Verification

procedures for sponsoring organizations

of day care homes.’’.

5. The appendix to the preamble

which appears on pages 905–915 is

corrected as follows:

a. On page 905, second column, in

line 13 of the second full paragraph:

1. the words ‘‘, and supplements’’ are

added after the word ‘‘breakfasts’’ in the

parentheses;

2. the comma after the right

parentheses is removed and replaced

with a period; and

3. the words ‘‘and such’’ before the

word ‘‘changes’’ are removed and the

word ‘‘These’’ is added in their place.

b. On page 905, Table 1, in footnote

a, in the first sentence, the first word

‘‘Percentage’’ is removed and the word

‘‘Percentages’’ is added in its place; and

the word ‘‘hoseholds’’ is removed and

the word ‘‘households’’ is added in its

place.

c. On page 905, Table 1, in footnote

a, in the second sentence, the word ‘‘to’’

is added after the word ‘‘propensities’’;

and the word ‘‘benefirts’’ is removed

and the word ‘‘benefits’’ is added in its

place.

d. On page 905, first column, in line

3, the first paragraph after Table 1, the

words ‘‘Associates, Inc.’’ are added after

the word ‘‘Abt’’.
5520 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

e. On page 906, Table 2, in the

column labeled ‘‘Difference,’’ a negative

sign (¥) is added before all of the

numbers in the column.

f. On page 906, third column, the

fourth line of text after Table 3, the

word ‘‘ing’’ is removed and the words

‘‘the costs resulting’’ are added after the

words ‘‘most of’’.

g. On page 907, Table 4, in the

column labeled ‘‘Dollars,’’ the number

‘‘¥332,324’’ is removed and the number

‘‘¥332,334’’ is added in its place.

h. On page 907, first column, after

Table 4, in the third paragraph, on line

6, a period is added after the first

occurrence of the word ‘‘DCHs’’.

i. On page 907, first column, after

Table 4, in the third paragraph, on line

6, the words ‘‘Virtually all’’ are added

after the newly added period.

j. On page 907, second column, after

Table 4, in the last paragraph, in line 3,

the footnote ‘‘3’’ is removed and a

footnote ‘‘5’’ is added in its place.

k. On page 908, first column, in the

last paragraph, on the third-to-last line,

the word ‘‘er’’ is removed and the words

‘‘impact of $133 per’’ are added.

l. On page 908, second column, in the

second paragraph under the ‘‘Costs to

Families’’ heading, on line 15, the word

‘‘recent’’ is removed and the words

‘‘represent a 10 percent’’ are added in its

place.

m. On page 909, second column, in

the first paragraph under the ‘‘Intended

Effect of Tiering’’ heading, on line 5, a

period is added after the words ‘‘P.L.

104–193’’.

n. On page 909, second column, in the

first paragraph under the ‘‘Tiering

Determination Burden’’ heading, line

13, the word ‘‘sponsor’’ is removed and

the words ‘‘the DCH provider’’ are

added in its place.

o. On page 909, third column, in the

first full paragraph, line 23, the word

‘‘93–35’’ is removed and the word ‘‘97–

35’’ is added in its place.

p. On page 909, third column, in the

first full paragraph, line 32, the word

‘‘enrollment’’ is removed and the words

‘‘two types of income’’ are added in its

place.

q. On page 910, first column, in the

first full paragraph, line 13, the words

‘‘percent of’’ are added after the word

‘‘6’’, and the words ‘‘DCHs that are only

area-eligible implies that 16 percent of

all DCHs will be approved for tier I’’ are

added after the words ‘‘6 percent of tier

I’’.

r. On page 910, third column, in the

paragraph under the heading ‘‘Data

Collection and Reporting Burden for

Sponsors,’’ 4th from last line, the words

‘‘CACFP State’’ are added after the

words ‘‘submits to its’’.

s. On page 912, second column, after

Table 7, in the first paragraph, the

words ‘‘The assumption that 40 percent

of children in mixed tier II DCHs are

income eligible. There is a clear

financial incentive for providers to

encourage their low-income families to

submit income information to sponsors.

This incentive and providers’ close

relationships with parents suggest that

providers will attempt to persuade

parents to provide the income

information and will thereby achieve a

response rate greater than the NSLP’s 80

percent; ninety percent was chosen.’’

are removed.

t. On page 912, third column, after

Table 7, in the first full paragraph, line

20, the word ‘‘DC’’ is removed and the

words ‘‘DCHs will be about’’ are added

in its place.

u. On page 913, first column, after

Table 8, in the first paragraph under the

heading ‘‘Costs to CACFP State

Agencies,’’ line 19, the word ‘‘hof’’ is

removed and the words ‘‘household

income of’’ are added in its place.

v. On page 914, third column, in the

footnote at the bottom of the column,

the letter ‘‘m’’ is added to the beginning

of the footnote.

Dated: January 30, 1997.

William E. Ludwig,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–2942 Filed 2–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–30–U

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

9 CFR Part 91

[Docket No. 96–054–2]

Ports Designated for the Exportation of

Animals; Georgia

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We are amending the

‘‘Inspection and Handling of Livestock

for Exportation’’ regulations by adding

Atlanta Hartsfield International Airport,

Atlanta, GA, as a port of embarkation

from which animals may be exported

from the United States and by adding

three Georgia facilities, the Atlanta

Equine Complex in Atlanta,

Tumbleweed Farm in Mableton, and

Southern Cross Ranch in Madison, to

the list of approved export inspection

facilities. These actions update the

regulations by adding a port and three

inspection facilities through which

animals may be processed for export.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 10, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Andrea Morgan, Senior Staff

Veterinarian, Import/Export Animals,

National Center for Import and Export,

VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 39,

Riverdale, MD 20737–1231, (301) 734–

8354.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The regulations in 9 CFR part 91,

‘‘Inspection and Handling of Livestock

for Exportation’’ (referred to below as

the regulations), prescribe conditions for

exporting animals from the United

States. The regulations state, among

other things, that all animals, except

animals being exported by land to

Canada or Mexico, must be exported

through designated ports of

embarkation.

Section 91.14(a) contains a list of

designated ports of embarkation and

export inspection facilities. To receive

designation as a port of embarkation, a

port must have export inspection

facilities available for the inspection,

holding, feeding, and watering of

animals prior to exportation to ensure

that the animals meet certain

requirements specified in the

regulations. To receive approval as an

export inspection facility, the

regulations provide that a facility must

meet specified standards in § 91.14(c)

concerning materials, size, inspection

implements, cleaning and disinfection,

feed and water, access, testing and

treatment, location, disposal of animal

wastes, lighting, office and restroom

facilities, and walkways.

On October 7, 1996, we published in

the Federal Register (61 FR 52387–

52388, Docket No. 96–054–1) a proposal

to amend the regulations by adding the

Atlanta Equine Complex in Atlanta, GA,

Tumbleweed Farm in Mableton, GA,

and Southern Cross Ranch in Madison,

GA, to the list in § 91.14(a) of designated

export inspection facilities. We also

proposed to add Atlanta Hartsfield

International Airport, Atlanta, GA, to

the list in § 91.14(a) of designated ports

of embarkation.

We solicited comments concerning

our proposal for 60 days ending

December 6, 1996. We did not receive

any comments. The facts presented in

the proposed rule still provide the basis

for this final rule.

Therefore, based on the rationale set

forth in the proposed rule, we are

adopting the provisions of the proposal

as a final rule without change.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Act

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12866. For this action,