[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 249 (Friday, December 29, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 90230-90402]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28488]



[[Page 90229]]

Vol. 88

Friday,

No. 249

December 29, 2023

Part II





Department of Agriculture





-----------------------------------------------------------------------





Food and Nutrition Service





-----------------------------------------------------------------------





7 CFR Parts 210, 220, 225, et al.





Establishing the Summer EBT Program and Rural Non-Congregate Option in 
the Summer Meal Programs; Interim Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 88 , No. 249 / Friday, December 29, 2023 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 90230]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food and Nutrition Service

7 CFR Parts 210, 220, 225, and 292

[FNS-2023-0029]
RIN 0584-AE96


Establishing the Summer EBT Program and Rural Non-Congregate 
Option in the Summer Meal Programs

AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), Department of Agriculture 
(USDA).

ACTION: Interim final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 requires the 
Secretary of Agriculture to make available an option to States to 
provide summer meals for non-congregate meal service in rural areas 
with no congregate meal service and to establish a permanent summer 
electronic benefits transfer for children program (Summer EBT) for the 
purpose of ensuring continued access to food when school is not in 
session for the summer. This interim final rule amends the Summer Food 
Service Program (SFSP) and the National School Lunch Program's Seamless 
Summer Option (SSO) regulations to codify the flexibility for rural 
program operators to provide non-congregate meal service in the SFSP 
and SSO, collectively referred to as the summer meal programs. This 
rule also establishes regulations and codifies the Summer EBT Program 
in the Code of Federal Regulations.

DATES: 
    Effective date: This rule is effective December 29, 2023.
    Comment date: To be considered, written comments on this interim 
final rule must be received on or before April 29, 2024.

ADDRESSES: The Food and Nutrition Service, USDA, invites interested 
persons to submit written comments on this interim final rule. Comments 
may be submitted in writing by one of the following methods:
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
    <bullet> Mail: Send comments to Community Meals Policy Division, 
USDA Food and Nutrition Service, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 
22314.
    <bullet> All written comments submitted in response to this interim 
final rule will be included in the record and will be made available to 
the public. Please be advised that the substance of the comments and 
the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments 
will be subject to public disclosure. USDA will make the written 
comments publicly available on the internet via https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. Kevin Maskornick, Division 
Director, Community Meals Policy Division, USDA Food and Nutrition 
Service, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314, telephone: 703-305-
2537.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
I. Background
    a. USDA's Vision for Complementary Summer Nutrition Programs
    b. Non-Congregate Meal Service
    c. Summer EBT
II. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule--SFSP and SSO Non-
Congregate Option
    a. Subpart A--Definitions
    i. Site, Congregate Meal Service, and Non-Congregate Meal 
Service
    ii. Rural
    iii. Conditional Non-Congregate Site
    iv. New Site
    v. Site Supervisor and Operating Costs
    vi. Good Standing
    b. Subpart B--State Agencies Responsibilities
    i. Department Notification
    ii. Program Management and Administration Plan
    iii. Priorities and Outreach Mandate
    iv. Application Requirements--Content of Sponsor Applications 
and Site Information Sheets
    v. Approval of Sites and Determining No Congregate Meal Service
    vi. Duration of Rural Designation
    vii. Clarifications to Existing Requirements: Free Meal Policy 
Statement, State-Sponsor Agreement, and Corrective Action Procedures
    c. Subpart C--Requirements for Sponsor Participation
    i. Sponsor Eligibility
    ii. Clarifications to Existing Requirements: General 
Requirements at 7 CFR 225.14(c)
    d. Subpart D--Responsibilities of Sponsors
    i. Identification and Determination of Eligible Children
    ii. Meal Ordering and Second Meals
    iii. Requirements Specific to Sponsors That Operate Conditional 
Non-Congregate Sites
    1. Certification To Collect Information on Participant 
Eligibility
    2. Notification to the Community
    e. Subpart E--Non-Congregate Meal Service
    i. Non-Congregate Meal Service Requirements
    ii. Non-Congregate Meal Service Options
    1. Multi-Day Meal Issuance
    2. Parent or Guardian Meal Pick-Up
    3. Bulk Meal Items
    iii. Offer Versus Serve
    iv. Clarifications to Existing Meal Service Requirements--Meal 
Service Times and Offsite Consumption of Foods
    f. Subpart F--Monitoring
    i. State Agency Responsibilities
    1. Pre-Approval Visits
    2. Sponsor and Site Reviews
    ii. Sponsor Responsibilities
    1. Training
    2. Site Reviews
    g. Subpart G--Miscellaneous
    i. Collection of Summer Meal Site Location Data
    ii. Reimbursements
    iii. SSO Non-Congregate Provisions
    iv. Annual Update To Approved Rural Data Sources
    h. Subpart H--Technical Amendments
    i. Subpart I--Severability
III. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule--Summer EBT
    a. Subpart A--General
    i. General Purpose and Scope
    ii. Definitions
    1. Existing Definitions
    2. Modified Definitions
    3. New Definitions
    iii. Administration
    1. Delegation of Responsibilities
    2. Authority To Waive Statute and Regulations
    b. Subpart B--Eligibility Standards and Criteria
    i. General Purpose and Scope
    ii. Eligibility
    iii. Period To Establish Eligibility
    c. Subpart C--Requirements of Summer EBT Agencies
    i. Plan for Operations and Management
    ii. Coordination Between State-Administered and ITO-Administered 
Summer EBT Programs
    iii. Advance Planning Document (APD) Processes
    iv. Enrolling Eligible Children
    1. Streamlined Certification
    2. Application Requirements
    3. Verification Requirements
    4. Notification of Eligibility, Denial, Appeal Rights, and the 
Ability To Opt-Out
    d. Subpart D--Issuance and Use of Program Benefits
    i. General Standards
    1. Benefit Issuance
    2. Dual Participation
    3. Benefit Amount
    4. Participant Support
    5. Expungement
    ii. Issuance and Adjustment Requirements Specific to States, 
Including Territories That Administer SNAP
    iii. Retailer Integrity Requirements Specific to States, 
Including Territories That Administer SNAP
    iv. Requirements Specific to Territories That Administer 
Nutrition Assistance Programs (NAP) Programs
    v. Requirements Specific to ITOs Administering Summer EBT
    e. Subpart E--General Administrative Requirements
    i. Payments to Summer EBT Agencies and Use of Administrative 
Program Funds
    1. Benefit Funds
    2. State Administrative Funds
    ii. Methods of Payment
    iii. Standards for Financial Management Systems
    iv. Performance Criteria
    v. Records and Reports
    vi. Audits and Management Control Evaluations

[[Page 90231]]

    1. Audits
    2. Management Control Evaluations
    vii. Investigations
    viii. Hearing Procedures for Families and Summer EBT Agencies
    ix. Claims
    x. Procurement Standards
    1. General
    2. Contractual Responsibilities
    3. Procedures
    xi. Miscellaneous Administrative Provisions
    1. Civil Rights
    2. Program Evaluations
    3. General Responsibilities
    xii. Information Collection/Recordkeeping--OMB Assigned Control 
Numbers
    f. Subpart F--Severability
IV. Coordinated Services Plan
V. Procedural Matters

I. Background

    Summer is frequently the most challenging time of the year for 
children at risk of food insecurity when they no longer have access to 
daily school meals. The Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), authorized 
under section 13 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act 
(NSLA), 42 U.S.C. 1761, has been the primary source of nutritional 
support for vulnerable children during the summer since its formal 
inception in 1975. The purpose of the SFSP is to provide nutritious 
meals to children in low-income areas when schools are not in session 
during the summer months, as well as during long school breaks in 
communities with year-round school calendars. Schools can also offer 
meals through the Seamless Summer Option (SSO) of the National School 
Lunch Program (NSLP), which allows school food authorities to provide 
meals to children during the summer months, school breaks, and 
unanticipated school closures using the procedures of the school lunch 
and breakfast programs. The SFSP and SSO are collectively referred to 
as USDA summer meal programs. Through the summer meal programs, program 
operators provide meals and snacks to children at meal sites in their 
communities; these meals are served at no cost to children and were 
historically required to be consumed in a congregate setting on the 
meal site premises.
    Among the USDA Child Nutrition Programs (CNPs), the summer meal 
programs are unique in many ways, including the seasonal nature of 
their operations, the diversity of organizations that operate the 
programs, and the range of sites at which meals are offered. Many sites 
offer summer programming in addition to meals. Meals served as part of 
the summer meal programs are served at a wide variety of sites, 
including schools, recreation centers, parks, camps, and places of 
worship. In July 2022, the summer meal programs served an average of 
4.1 million children daily at more than 36,000 sites nationwide.
    Although the summer meal programs are an important source of 
nutrition for many children, program access remains inconsistent or out 
of reach for some communities and families that cannot reliably access 
summer meals. Children who may have difficulty accessing summer meals 
include those:
    <bullet> living in rural areas who would have to travel long 
distances to receive a meal,
    <bullet> living in communities without summer meal sites,
    <bullet> living in areas with limited safe and reliable 
transportation options, and in families whose schedules do not allow 
them to travel to a site daily.
    USDA, State administering agencies, program operators, and other 
nutrition security champions have worked hard to expand the reach of 
summer meal programs over the years. Despite these efforts, only 1 in 6 
children \1\ who eat free or reduced price school meals participate in 
the summer meal programs in a typical year, leaving a large gap between 
children in need of summer meals and those who receive them. This 
ongoing summer nutrition gap indicates that the nutritional needs of 
children throughout the U.S. during the summer months cannot be met 
with a one-size-fits-all approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Calculated from 2022 FNS administrative data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In December 2022, Congress took action to address the summer 
nutrition gap by providing new tools to serve low-income children 
during the summer months. On December 29, 2022, President Biden signed 
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (the Act) (Pub. L. 117-328), 
which amended section 13 of the NSLA to allow children in rural areas 
to take their meals off-site beginning in 2023, and established a 
permanent, nationwide Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children 
Program (Summer EBT) beginning in 2024. Regulations to amend the summer 
meal programs and establish Summer EBT are being promulgated through 
this interim final rule (IFR), as required by the Act.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(13)(F) (``Not later than 1 year after 
December 29, 2022, the Secretary shall promulgate regulations (which 
shall include interim final regulations) to carry out this section. 
. . .'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above and pursuant to the requirements of the NSLA, 
which authorizes the summer meal programs, summer meal program rules 
previously required that children remain at a meal service site while 
they consumed their meal or snack. This approach to program 
implementation, known as congregate meal service, has many benefits 
including providing the opportunity for children to socialize and 
engage in supervised activities offered at the site. However, as 
previously noted, some communities lack the resources or infrastructure 
to operate meal sites and supervise a meal service, and some families 
face significant barriers traveling to a site for each meal. The Act 
addresses these challenges by providing flexibility for sites in rural 
areas to provide a non-congregate meal service, which means allowing 
children to take meals off-site, for example, to their homes.
    The Act also authorized a new permanent method for offering 
additional summer nutrition assistance for children. The new Summer EBT 
program will provide benefits on EBT cards so that families can 
purchase food for their children. Together, these changes will 
revolutionize how our nation supports the nutritional needs of children 
during the summer months, when school is not in session.
    These two alternatives to connecting children to nutrition during 
the summer may be new as permanent options, but both have been tested 
extensively in recent years. Non-congregate meal service in the summer 
meal programs has been tested through demonstration projects, program 
waivers during the COVID-19 pandemic, and operational guidance in 
summer 2023; Summer EBT has been piloted through demonstration projects 
since 2011 and the Pandemic EBT program offered in response to COVID-19 
was similar to Summer EBT in many ways.

A. USDA's Vision for Complementary Summer Nutrition Programs

    USDA's goal across all summer nutrition programs is simple: to 
connect children with nutritious food during the summer months. While 
traditional congregate summer meal service remains a vital tool for 
providing low-income children with nutritious meals at no cost, USDA 
recognizes that not all children who would benefit from summer 
nutrition assistance are currently being reached through existing 
Programs. Due to numerous barriers to access that have already been 
highlighted, including time, distance, and transportation, many 
children who are eligible for free and reduced price school meals are 
not well served by traditional congregate summer meal sites. In 
particular, these challenges have been historically difficult to 
overcome in rural areas. USDA's goal is

[[Page 90232]]

to leverage the provisions codified through this IFR, working 
aggressively to close access gaps and ensure that children receive 
critical nutrition assistance during the summer months.
    The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, as implemented by this 
rulemaking, expands the reach of USDA's summer nutrition programs by 
establishing three distinct and essential pillars of summer nutrition 
assistance that will work in tandem and in a complementary fashion. In 
addition to the traditional congregate summer meal option provided 
through the SFSP and the SSO, State agencies and Program operators can 
now utilize two new methods of providing children with summer nutrition 
assistance. Non-congregate meal service will address critical access 
challenges in rural areas by allowing SFSP and SSO Program operators to 
provide meals available for pick up or delivery that children can eat 
at the time and place that is convenient for them. Summer EBT is a 
nationwide, permanently authorized program that provides EBT benefits 
to eligible children that can be used to buy groceries. Taken together, 
these three pathways for providing summer nutrition assistance will 
help to better support rural, suburban, and urban communities alike.
    The complementary nature of these nutrition assistance options is 
the foundation of their great potential to benefit children across the 
nation. They are intended to be used simultaneously for the purposes of 
delivering a more complete summer nutrition safety net. To illustrate, 
SFSP and SSO meal sites have provided nutritious summer meals, as well 
as recreational, educational, and other enrichment opportunities to 
generations of children. However, in rural areas, where there may be a 
lack of transportation, sites, funds, and staff to support traditional 
congregate meal service, non-congregate meal service can be used to 
help provide children in these areas with equitable access to 
nutritious food. Significantly, the provisions established by the Act 
and implemented under this rulemaking also allow for program operators 
to use the non-congregate option to complement congregate meals at the 
times when congregate meal service is not offered; for example, a rural 
site serving congregate meals during the week may also offer 
``wraparound'' service, providing take-home meals for the weekend. The 
Summer EBT Program's addition of EBT benefits for children introduces a 
new layer of nutrition assistance that is flexible and allows families 
to supplement summer meals with foods of their choice that are 
available anytime, including when meal sites are not open. The 
combination of these three approaches for providing nutrition during 
the summer months will help to ensure both equitable and more 
comprehensive access for children, and USDA looks forward to continued 
partnership with States, Tribes, and local stakeholders to use all the 
tools that are now available to meet their communities' needs.

B. Non-Congregate Meal Service

Demonstration Projects
    The Act instructed USDA to incorporate best practices and lessons 
learned from demonstration projects carried out under section 749(g) of 
the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Administration, and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. L. 111-80; 123 Stat. 
2132), which provided $85 million to USDA beginning in 2010 to initiate 
and implement the Summer Food for Children demonstration projects.\3\ 
One demonstration project was the Enhanced Summer Food Service Program 
(eSFSP), which tested changes to the existing structure and delivery 
mechanism of SFSP for the purpose of determining effects on program 
participation. The eSFSP included the Meal Delivery demonstration which 
offered breakfast and lunch delivery to homes of eligible children in 
rural areas, as well as the Food Backpack demonstration which provided 
weekend and holiday meals to SFSP participants for consumption when 
SFSP sites were not open. In 2013, the demonstration project for Non-
Congregate Feeding for Outdoor Summer Feeding Sites Experiencing Excess 
Heat was first implemented. Under this demonstration project, SFSP and 
SSO sponsors who were operating approved outdoor meal sites without 
temperature-controlled alternative sites could operate as non-
congregate sites on days when the area was experiencing excessive heat. 
In addition to excessive heat, USDA approved four States to participate 
in the demonstration due to smoke and air-quality concerns in summer 
2019. In more recent years, USDA implemented Meals-to-You (MTY) under 
the demonstration authority. MTY was developed in response to 
stakeholder feedback about the challenges and difficulties of serving 
summer meals in sparsely populated communities and remote areas. 
Through MTY, food boxes were mailed directly to families of children 
who were eligible for free or reduced price school meals. Each eligible 
child received a weekly box, which contained five breakfast meals, five 
snacks, and five lunch/supper meals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Information and supporting materials on each of the Summer 
Food for Children demonstration projects are available at: https://www.fns.usda.gov/ops/summer-food-children-demonstrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Historically, non-congregate meals were operated on a small scale 
through the above mentioned demonstration projects. However, during the 
COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE), non-congregate meals became 
more widely available as an important part of USDA's response to the 
pandemic. In March 2020, Federal, State, and local level efforts to 
reduce the spread of COVID-19 resulted in the abrupt closure of schools 
across the country, disrupting access to school meals for millions of 
children. In response, State agencies and program operators requested 
individual waivers under the authority of section 12(l) of the NSLA and 
implemented program flexibilities, such as the flexibility to allow 
non-congregate meal service through SFSP and SSO. To better address the 
urgent need for resources and operational flexibilities required to 
serve children throughout the pandemic, Congress provided USDA with 
temporary authority to waive statute and regulations on a nationwide 
basis for Child Nutrition Programs through the Families First 
Coronavirus Response Act of 2020 (FFRCA) (Pub. L. 116-127), and later 
through subsequent statutory extensions to help USDA continue to 
respond to changing needs throughout the pandemic. Such efforts 
included USDA issuing the Nationwide Waiver to Allow Non-Congregate 
Feeding and other complementary non-congregate waivers under section 
2202(a) of the FFCRA. These waivers ensured that children continued to 
receive nutritious meals and helped to mitigate the impacts of the 
COVID-19 PHE.
    For summer 2023, USDA provided guidance on non-congregate meal 
service operations in rural areas as required by the Act. Many of the 
non-congregate flexibilities allowed for summer 2023 operations were 
allowed through previous demonstrations, waivers, and guidance on non-
congregate meal service operations during the COVID-19 PHE. Through 
this IFR, USDA is promulgating regulations for the summer meal programs 
rural non-congregate option for program year 2024 and beyond. These 
regulations are based on a combination of best practices from 
demonstration projects, non-congregate flexibilities offered during the 
COVID-19 pandemic, and prior guidance that was issued for operating 
rural non-

[[Page 90233]]

congregate meal service in summer 2023.
Stakeholder Feedback
    Between April 5, 2023, and June 15, 2023, USDA hosted 21 listening 
sessions with external stakeholders on the topic of non-congregate 
summer meals. Input was gathered from State agency program 
administrators,\4\ school food authorities (SFAs) and other program 
operators, advocacy groups, and program participants. Listening session 
participants were asked a series of questions related to 
implementation, service models, program integrity, challenges, 
benefits, and definitions; each session also included open time where 
participants could share additional thoughts of interest to them. USDA 
also held consultations with Tribal leaders from Indian Tribal 
Organizations (ITOs) to obtain their input on the topic of non-
congregate summer meals, as well as rural experts at Federal agencies 
to obtain their input on defining and identifying rural areas. USDA 
recorded and analyzed all comments shared during the listening sessions 
and has taken all comments into careful consideration when developing 
this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ USDA invited all State agencies to provide input, and the 
vast majority (47) of States actively participated in the listening 
sessions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Stakeholders were generally positive about non-congregate summer 
meals, citing enhanced program access as the primary benefit. However, 
14 State agencies voiced concerns with program integrity and five State 
agencies expressed concern about nutritional quality and/or food safety 
of meals served. Fifteen additional stakeholders voiced concern about 
inadequate staff support to manage non-congregate meal service. 
Stakeholders said that the existing (long-standing) definition of 
``rural'' did not sufficiently encompass rural areas and offered ideas 
for how the definition of ``rural'' could be expanded (see section II. 
A. ii. for rural definition discussion). Finally, stakeholders 
requested clear and timely guidance from USDA on a wide range of 
topics, including best practices, eligibility, and program integrity 
efforts; State agencies requested that guidance be issued anywhere from 
6 to 18 months in advance of summer program operations.

C. Summer EBT

    Section 13A of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 
U.S.C. 1762, authorizes the Secretary to establish a program under 
which States, and Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) that administer 
the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and 
Children (WIC), electing to participate in the Summer EBT Program may, 
beginning in Summer 2024 and annually thereafter, issue to each 
eligible household Summer EBT benefits. For 2024, the value of the 
benefit will be $40 per child for each month of the summer with amounts 
adjusted for Alaska, Hawaii, and the U.S. Territories.
Summer EBT Demonstration Projects
    Although Summer EBT is the newest, permanent Federal food 
assistance entitlement program, it is not a new approach to addressing 
food insecurity during the summer months. In fact, Summer EBT has been 
tested through more than a decade of demonstration projects 
administered by USDA in collaboration with States and Indian Tribal 
Organizations. Prior to the publication of this interim final 
rulemaking, and under the same authority as the SFSP demonstration 
projects provided in 2010 (section 749(g) of the Agriculture, Rural 
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. L. 111-80; 123 Stat. 2132)), the Summer 
Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children (SEBTC) demonstration project 
was implemented to help reduce summer food insecurity among children. 
Starting in 2011, the SEBTC demonstration distributed a monthly food 
benefit during the summer months to children eligible for free or 
reduced price school meals. Most States operating the demonstration 
projects utilized a debit card (or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 
Program (SNAP)) model whereby eligible participants received benefits 
on a debit card, which could be redeemed at any SNAP-authorized 
retailer. Some States and several ITOs operated the Summer EBT program 
using a WIC-like model whereby eligible participants could purchase 
only foods prescribed in a defined food package at WIC-authorized 
retailers using their Summer EBT cards.
    Through rigorous evaluation, the SEBTC demonstration projects have 
proven successful at mitigating food insecurity and improving diet 
quality and variety. SEBTC benefits reduced the most severe category of 
food insecurity among children during the summer by one-third when 
compared to those receiving no benefits.\5\ Evaluations of USDA's 
previous experience with SEBTC demonstration projects indicated that 
this model could be effectively implemented in a wide variety of 
communities. The SEBTC demonstration projects were an innovative 
approach to meeting the nutritional needs of children during the summer 
months as the model provides families with flexibility to purchase food 
for their children at times and places that are convenient for them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2013). SEBTC Demonstration: 
Evaluation Findings for the Full Implementation Year 2012 Final 
Report. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. 
https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/SEBTC2012.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer
    The effectiveness of the SEBTC demonstration projects facilitated 
the implementation of Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer (P-EBT). 
From 2020 to 2023, P-EBT was part of the COVID-19 pandemic response to 
prevent food insecurity among children while they did not have access 
to school meals. The Families First Coronavirus Response Act, (Pub. L. 
116-127), as amended by the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and 
Other Extensions Act (Pub. L. 116-159), the Consolidated Appropriations 
Act, 2021 (Pub. L. 116-260), the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (Pub. 
L. 117-2), and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-
328) provided the Secretary authority to approve State agency plans to 
administer P-EBT. Children were eligible to receive P-EBT benefits if 
they would have received free or reduced price meals under the NSLA but 
missed those meals due to COVID-19. For example, the child's school was 
closed or operating at reduced hours or attendance due to COVID-19, or 
the child did not attend school because they were sick with COVID-19. 
Through P-EBT, eligible school children received temporary emergency 
nutrition benefits through EBT cards that families could use to 
purchase food at local retailers, allowing families with eligible 
children to purchase healthy food more easily during the pandemic.
    The American Rescue Plan Act (Pub. L. 117-2) specifically 
authorized the extension of P-EBT for the covered summer period after 
any school year in which there was a public health emergency 
designation for all children who met P-EBT income eligibility 
requirements under the schools component of P-EBT. In December 2023, 
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328) authorized 
USDA to allow State agencies to implement P-EBT for summer 2023 without 
the need for an approved P-EBT plan for the preceding school year, 
limited P-EBT eligibility for school children to only those children 
who attended NSLP-participating schools at the end of the preceding 
school year,

[[Page 90234]]

and redefined the P-EBT benefit amount for summer 2023 to $120 for the 
entire covered period, with amounts adjusted for Alaska, Hawaii, and 
the U.S. Territories.
    With the end of the COVID-19 PHE on May 11, 2023, FY 2023 was the 
final fiscal year that children were eligible for P-EBT benefits. The 
permanent Summer EBT program for school-aged children will begin in 
summer 2024 ensuring eligible school-aged children will continue to 
receive critical nutrition assistance.
Summer EBT as a Permanent Program
    Beginning in summer 2024, the NSLA permanently establishes Summer 
EBT benefits at $40 per month per eligible child and indexes the 
benefit to the SNAP Thrifty Food Plan to account for inflation. Summer 
EBT will provide EBT benefits to children from low-income households 
during the summer months to ensure continued access to nutrition when 
school is not in session. USDA anticipates that Summer EBT will help to 
close the summer nutrition gap for more than 29 million children once 
implemented nationwide. As amended, the NSLA allows States that 
participate in SNAP and Territories participating in NAP (including 
Puerto Rico, American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern 
Mariana Islands) to issue benefits which are usable at SNAP or NAP 
retailers. The NSLA also provides that ITOs administering WIC may 
deliver Summer EBT benefits to be used at WIC authorized retailers. 
Benefit redemptions are made through EBT cards or `other electronic 
methods.' The permanent Summer EBT Program is separate and distinct 
from the earlier SEBTC demonstration projects, which were limited in 
scope and conducted for the purpose of gaining insight into the 
effectiveness of the model. The permanent Summer EBT Program is also 
separate and distinct from P-EBT, which was a specific Federal 
Government response to COVID-19.
    USDA published the following initial guidance for 2024 Summer EBT 
implementation prior to publication of this rulemaking to assist States 
with preparations:
    1. SEBT 01-2023, Initial Guidance for State Implementation of 
Summer EBT in 2024, June 7, 2023;
    2. SEBT 02-2023, Initial Guidance for Implementation of Summer EBT 
in 2024 by Indian Tribal Organizations Administering WIC, June 13, 
2023;
    3. SEBT 03-2023, Summer EBT Eligibility, Certification, and 
Verification, July 31, 2023;
    4. SEBT 01-2024, Summer EBT Administrative Funding Process for 
FY2024, October 18, 2023.
    Through this rulemaking, the Summer EBT Program will be codified in 
a new part 292 of Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which 
will supersede the memos listed above.
Summary of Stakeholder Feedback
    Between April and June 2023, USDA hosted 24 listening sessions to 
solicit input about Summer EBT from State agencies administering SNAP 
and Child Nutrition Programs, school food authorities (SFAs) and other 
program operators, advocacy groups, local elected officials, and 
families. USDA also consulted with Tribal leaders on Summer EBT in May 
2023, attended two conferences to meet with and gather feedback 
directly from ITOs administering WIC, and met with Tribal WIC 
administrators virtually. Listening session participants were asked for 
input about approaches to program implementation, program integrity, 
program costs, customer service, and technical aspects of Summer EBT 
operations. Participants were offered the opportunity to raise other 
issues of interest to them as well. USDA carefully considered this 
input when developing this rule.
    Across listening sessions, State agencies, school food authorities, 
program participants and external organizations consistently expressed 
a desire for the Summer EBT program to run seamlessly and 
automatically, particularly around eligibility determinations and 
enrollment. State agencies, SFAs, and advocates expressed that data 
sharing and collection between State agencies [and between State 
agencies and local education agencies (LEAs)] must be streamlined and 
automated, and noted that centralized databases could help simplify the 
data-sharing process. Relatedly, many State agencies, school food 
authorities, and external organizations identified the need for States 
to provide Statewide applications for children who must apply using a 
Summer EBT application to avoid placing the responsibility of 
collecting and processing applications on LEAs, especially those 
participating in the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) who do not 
collect school meals applications. Some State agency staff asked that 
USDA provide and maintain a nationwide Summer EBT application. There 
was universal concern about the impacts for both LEAs and households of 
requiring students at special provision schools (e.g., CEP schools) who 
are not ``identified'' to apply for Summer EBT. Households with 
children enrolled in provision schools are not accustomed to completing 
annual income applications for school meal benefits and may not know if 
their child is ``identified'' through participation in other means 
tested programs or if an income application must be completed. Without 
effective processes to communicate with families and to collect 
applications, this could cause confusion and negatively impact program 
participation. Likewise, many CEP schools do not collect income 
applications even on a periodic basis as eligibility because the level 
of Federal reimbursement for the NSLP/SBP is solely based on the number 
of identified students. These schools do not currently have resources 
and staffing to support this effort. Additionally, a number of external 
organizations and States urged USDA to allow the use of ``alternative'' 
income applications to confer Summer EBT eligibility.
    Additionally, FNS received numerous inquiries from States regarding 
which State Agency should lead the Summer EBT Program. Although SNAP 
and Child Nutrition Programs are generally administered by separate 
agencies at the State level, these agencies have historically teamed up 
to improve children's nutrition. For example, SNAP and Child Nutrition 
agencies successfully stood up and implemented direct certification, a 
process that streamlines enrollment and reduces burden for millions of 
children every year, and they jointly provided P-EBT benefits at a time 
when many children were vulnerable to food insecurity. Similarly, State 
agencies should work together in a collaborative way to determine how 
they can best use their resources and expertise to support Summer EBT, 
and jointly decide the appropriate roles and responsibilities of each 
agency.
    State agencies, ITOs, and external organizations expressed 
significant concerns about the 50 percent match funding required for 
Summer EBT administrative costs, particularly given the fact that, in 
many States, the window to request or allocate State funding for Summer 
EBT through the regular budgetary process was closing or had already 
closed. Some States shared that this may prevent them from standing up 
the program in Summer 2024. ITOs similarly expressed concerns about the 
required match, and specifically asked for a ``planning year'' in which 
benefits are not issued, but administrative funding can be received to 
set up the program. States and ITOs also requested clearer guidance 
from

[[Page 90235]]

USDA related to administrative funding and financial management.
    States, school food authorities, and advocates also discussed 
lessons learned from operating P-EBT, and ways to improve operations 
when delivering the Summer EBT Program. Specifically, USDA heard the 
importance of delivering benefits timely, developing clear lines of 
communication on customer service (e.g., clear points of contact for 
households), and increased participant education, such as better 
messaging to households. States and advocates also noted the need to 
improve data quality, primarily ensuring that addresses for 
participants are accurate and current at the time benefits are issued.
    Finally, ITOs shared robust feedback on three specific topics: the 
benefit delivery model for ITOs, enrolling eligible children, and de-
duplication of benefits.
    ITOs shared that they would appreciate flexibility in the benefit 
delivery model, meaning the ability to operate using a cash value 
benefit (CVB), a food package, a combination of the two, or an 
alternative approach. ITOs also shared concerns about communicating 
with families about the option to participate in the ITO-administered 
program and coordinating with States to ensure that children do not 
receive benefits from both State and ITO-operated Summer EBT programs. 
ITOs thus asked USDA to issue strong regulatory language requiring 
States to cooperate with ITOs on general program operations and data 
sharing. Additionally, ITOs recommended that ITOs administering the 
Program serve their entire jurisdictions to streamline program 
implementation and minimize de-duplication.

II. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule--SFSP and SSO Non-Congregate 
Option

    This section of the preamble discusses the actions USDA is taking 
to implement the statutory provisions for non-congregate meal service 
in the SFSP in 7 CFR part 225 and the SSO in 7 CFR parts 210 and 220. 
All Program regulations and guidance, instructions, and handbooks 
issued by the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) apply to both 
congregate and non-congregate operations except as otherwise specified 
through this rulemaking.

A. Definitions

i. Site, Congregate Meal Service, and Non-Congregate Meal Service
    SFSP regulations under 7 CFR part 225 have historically been framed 
in the context of the long-standing congregate meal service model under 
the NSLA. Prior to amendments made in the Act, provisions under the 
NSLA at 42 U.S.C. 1753(b)(1)(A), 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(1)(D) and Program 
regulations at Sec.  225.6(i)(15) required Program meals to be served 
in a congregate setting and consumed by participants on site in order 
to be eligible for reimbursement. Therefore, under current regulations 
at Sec.  225.2, ``site'' means a physical location at which a sponsor 
provides a food service for children and at which children consume 
meals in a supervised setting. Currently, there is no separate 
statutory or regulatory definition of congregate meal service. However, 
the establishment of the non-congregate meal service option underscores 
the need to explicitly define and distinguish congregate and non-
congregate meal service for Program purposes.
    For Summer 2023, the NSLA was amended to allow Program operators to 
operate a non-congregate meal service in rural areas consistent with 
implementation models previously used in USDA summer demonstration 
projects, as discussed in section I. B. of this IFR. The two models 
available for both SFSP and SSO during summer 2023 were home delivery 
and meal pick-up. Under the home delivery model, meals are delivered 
directly to homes in eligible areas with eligible children. In the 
context of this model, FNS advised State agencies and sponsors through 
summer 2023 guidance to consider the non-congregate meal service 
operation overall as the site (for example, a delivery route or courier 
distribution process), instead of the individual residences to which 
the meals were delivered. Therefore, the inclusion of the phrases 
``physical location'' and ``supervised setting'' in the definition of 
site at 7 CFR 225.2 is inconsistent with providing different models of 
non-congregate meal service, as non-congregate meals can be consumed 
anywhere, and do not have to be consumed under supervision.
    Therefore, this rulemaking revises the existing definition of 
``site'' and adds new definitions of ``congregate meal service'' and 
``non-congregate meal service'' to provide clarity and applicability to 
new and existing Program requirements. USDA is codifying these working 
definitions as established in summer 2023 guidance into part 225.
    Accordingly, this IFR makes the following amendments in Sec.  
225.2:
    <bullet> Amends the definition of ``site'' to mean the place where 
a child receives a Program meal. A site may be the indoor or outdoor 
location where congregate meals are served, a stop on a delivery route 
of a mobile congregate meal service, or the distribution location or 
route for a non-congregate meal service. However, a child's residence 
is not considered a non-congregate meal site for Program monitoring 
purposes.
    <bullet> Adds a definition of ``congregate meal service'' to mean a 
food service at which meals that are provided to children are consumed 
on site in a supervised setting; and
    <bullet> Adds a definition of ``non-congregate meal service'' to 
mean a food service at which meals are provided for children to consume 
all the components off-site. The definition further clarifies that non-
congregate meal service must only be operated at sites designated as 
``rural'' and with no ``congregate meal service,'' as determined in 
Sec.  225.6(h)(3) and (4).
ii. Rural
    Newly added section 13(a)(13)(A) of the NSLA makes available to 
States the option to provide Program meals for non-congregate 
consumption in a rural area with no congregate meal service. This 
expansion of summer meal service prompted renewed interest in 
reviewing, revising, and modernizing the SFSP's long-standing 
definition of ``rural.''
    In 1978, the Department proposed a definition of ``rural'' (44 FR 
8) in response to the provisions of the NSLA and Child Nutrition 
Amendments of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-166), which amended section 13(a)(4) of 
the NSLA, 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(4), to include a rural outreach mandate. 
Public Law 95-166 also instructed USDA to conduct a study of the food 
service operations to include: (i) an evaluation of meal quality as 
related to costs; and (ii) a determination whether adjustments in the 
maximum reimbursement levels for food service operation costs 
prescribed in the NSLA should be made, including whether different 
reimbursement levels should be established for self-prepared meals and 
vended meals and which site-related costs, if any, should be considered 
administrative costs. Through this study, USDA confirmed sponsors that 
prepare their own meals and sponsors that operate in rural areas may 
incur higher costs than other types of sponsors [44 FR 36365, January 
2, 1979]. As a result, USDA provided additional reimbursement to rural 
sites and self-preparation sites in the final rulemaking, which still 
stands today under regulations at Sec.  225.9(d)(7). Because of the 
fiscal implications under that final rulemaking, USDA also codified the 
definition of ``rural'' as proposed (Rural means any county

[[Page 90236]]

which is not a part of a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area as 
defined by the Office of Management and Budget). USDA had considered 
revising the definition of rural to include ``pockets'' of rurality 
within Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs); however, USDA was not 
able to develop a universally applicable definition based on the varied 
data collected at the time of the rulemaking and said it would re-
consider the definition after evaluating implementation of the 
provisions in the 1979 program year. In 1980, based on experience 
gained during the 1979 Program year, the Department revised the 
definition of ``rural'' to include an option for States, with 
concurrence from USDA, to establish ``pockets'' of rurality within MSAs 
(45 FR 1844). The rural definition has not been further updated since 
1980.
    SFSP regulations at Sec.  225.2 define ``rural'' as: (a) any area 
in a county which is not a part of a MSA or (b) any ``pocket'' within a 
MSA which, at the option of the State agency and with Food and 
Nutrition Service Regional Office (FNSRO) concurrence, is determined to 
be geographically isolated from urban areas. The current definition is 
based on the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Standards for 
delineating core-based statistical areas (CBSA), specifically MSAs. 
Delineations are the result of the application of published standards 
to Census Bureau data on population estimates and commuting ties. USDA 
has released guidance over the years to provide technical assistance to 
States in this area. On April 21, 2015, USDA published memorandum SFSP 
17-2015, Rural Designations in the Summer Food Service Program--
Revised, available at: Rural Designations in the Summer Food Service 
Program--Revised [bond] Food and Nutrition Service (usda.gov), to 
clarify rural designations in SFSP and to promote the use of FNS' Rural 
Designation Map, which was designed to help State agencies and sponsors 
more easily identify rural areas according to paragraph (a) of the 
regulatory definition.
    After the release of initial summer 2023 rural non-congregate 
guidance, USDA heard concerns from stakeholders that the current 
definition of ``rural'' was too generalized geographically to identify 
rural areas and pockets effectively. MSAs are comprised of a central 
county or counties containing the core area (i.e., the central urban 
area with a population of 50,000 or more) plus adjacent outlying 
counties having a high degree of social and economic integration with 
that core as measured through commuting. Because MSAs can include a 
cluster of counties surrounding one county with an urban center and 
because counties can be geographically expansive, MSAs often encompass 
areas that are considered rural based on additional information such as 
data at the census tract level. For example, a census tract within an 
outlying county may be sparsely populated and could be considered 
rural, but the county contains other census tracts or areas that have a 
high degree of social and economic integration with the population 
core, which results in the county being classified as part of the MSA.
    Therefore, after consultation with Federal partners, USDA provided 
further guidance allowing States to use the following classification 
schemes to designate rural areas and pockets in summer 2023: (1) USDA 
Economic Research Service's (USDA-ERS) Rural Urban Commuting Area 
(RUCA) codes 4-10, and in some isolated cases, RUCA codes 2-3; (2) 
USDA-ERS' Rural-Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC) 4-9; (3) USDA-ERS' Urban 
Influence Codes (UIC) 3-12; and (4) the National Center for Education 
Statistics (NCES) Locale Classifications and Criteria, codes 41-43. The 
guidance also allowed for the use of other data sources on a case-by-
case basis with FNS approval.
    In the listening sessions held to inform this rule, stakeholders 
confirmed that the current definition of rural in Sec.  225.2 does not 
adequately capture all rural areas. Stakeholders shared that the 
limitations of the existing definition were largely addressed by the 
addition of the classification schemes allowed in summer 2023 and noted 
that the use of these schemes seemed to satisfy most site location 
requests. However, some stakeholders still encouraged USDA to consider 
other factors in the definition of rural such as: access to public 
transportation, food deserts, physical barriers, and characteristics of 
rurality. One stakeholder encouraged USDA avoid overly rigid criteria 
or reliance on physical characteristics as many of these elements are 
influenced by community and State resources and priorities rather than 
inherent qualities, and that defining features of rural communities may 
vary by region. State agencies also reported a need for a streamlined 
process for identifying and approving rural areas and pockets, and 
requested one comprehensive mapping tool to determine rural 
designation. Therefore, based on feedback received from stakeholders 
and Federal partners, USDA is revising the current definition of 
``rural'' to include the classification systems allowed for summer 2023 
implementation. These classification schemes were used in summer 2023 
to identify rural ``pockets,'' but now will be incorporated into the 
regulatory definition to define what rural is under the Program. In 
addition, this IFR will amend the current definition to provide 
discretion for the Department to accommodate updates to these 
classification schemes and to consider other classification schemes 
that were not identified through summer 2023 operations. Finally, USDA 
agrees with comments that potential community characteristics such as 
the presence of food deserts and physical barriers are not inherently 
rural or objective measures of rurality, nor may they be necessarily 
applied consistently across States and communities. However, to 
accommodate possible alternative standards that may be developed or 
identified, the revised definition will allow State agencies and USDA 
to consider requests to designate areas that may be rural in character 
based on other data sources on a case-by-case basis. Under this 
rulemaking, the definition of rural will mean:
    <bullet> Any area in a county not a part of an MSA based on the 
OMB's delineation of MSAs. This criterion will allow for non-MSA 
counties to be designated as rural under the Program.
    <bullet> Any area in a county classified as a non-metropolitan area 
based on RUCC and UIC. This criterion will allow for counties 
classified as rural according to USDA-ERS' RUCC and UIC codes to be 
designated as rural under the Program.
    <bullet> Any census tract classified as a non-metropolitan area 
based on RUCA codes. This criterion will allow census tract areas 
classified as rural according to USDA-ERS' RUCA codes to be designated 
as rural under the Program.
    <bullet> Any area of an MSA not part of a Census Bureau-defined 
urban area. This criterion will allow for areas located within MSAs 
that are classified as rural according to NCES' Locale Classifications 
and Criteria, which is based on the Census Bureau's urban and rural 
areas, to be designated as rural under the Program.
    <bullet> Any area of a State, which is not part of an urban area as 
determined by the Secretary; or,
    <bullet> Any ``pocket'' within an MSA which, at the option of the 
State agency and with FNSRO approval, is determined to be rural in 
character based on other data sources. These last two criteria provide 
discretion for the Department and the State agency to consider other 
areas that may not be identified through this new definition.
    <bullet> Any subsequent substitution or update of the 
aforementioned

[[Page 90237]]

classification schemes that Federal governing bodies create. This 
criterion is intended to accommodate updates or substitutions to the 
classification schemes that will be incorporated into the definition 
under this rule.
    This framework more accurately represents rural populations and 
territories and is responsive to stakeholder feedback, while upholding 
established standard measures of rurality. Expanding the definition to 
allow the use of multiple recognized Federal classification schemes to 
designate areas as rural (without having to seek prior USDA approval) 
will also ease administrative burden and streamline the site 
identification and approval process for State agencies and Program 
operators. It also acknowledges the frequent stakeholder concern that 
any one objective measure cannot capture all rural pockets, and 
therefore, allows discretion for State agencies to identify rural 
pockets based on other data sources if needed with approval from USDA.
    Accordingly, this rule expands the definition of ``rural'' in Sec.  
225.2 to include rural populations and territories within MSAs based on 
the summer 2023 approved sources, and to provide flexibility for 
``pockets'' based on other data sources on a case-by-case basis. The 
amended definition of ``rural'' in Sec.  225.2 will also provide 
discretion to USDA for any potential updates or changes to 
classification schemes at a future date. Following the publication of 
this rule, USDA will also release an updated FNS Rural Designation Map 
to reflect the new, comprehensive framework, which will provide one 
comprehensive mapping tool to assist State agencies in determining 
rural designations. In addition, this rule adds a new provision to 
establish an annual effective date by which USDA will issue updates to 
the approved rural data sources to be used for rural designations in 
that program year. The IFR also adds an effective period to the rural 
designation to establish the frequency at which sponsors must re-
establish rural designation for non-congregate meal service sites. See 
section II. G. iv. and section II. B. vi., respectively, for a 
discussion of those provisions.
iii. Conditional Non-Congregate Site
    Prior to the Act, sites were required to be located in areas which 
meet the definition of ``areas in which poor economic conditions 
exist'' or qualify as camps. Specific to non-congregate meals, the Act 
amended the NSLA to allow meal service in rural areas that are not 
areas in which poor economic conditions exist for children who are 
determined to be eligible for free or reduced price school meals. The 
current regulations under Sec.  225.2 do not include a definition for a 
site which qualifies for Program participation on the basis that the 
site conducts a non-congregate meal service for eligible children in an 
area that does not meet the definitions of ``areas in which poor 
economic conditions exist,'' and which does not qualify as a camp.
    Under statutory and regulatory requirements, for Program purposes 
``areas in which poor economic conditions exist'' is defined as: (1) 
The attendance area of a school in which at least 50 percent of the 
enrolled children have been determined eligible for free or reduced 
price school meals under the NSLP and the School Breakfast Program 
(SBP); (2) A geographic area where, based on the most recent census 
data available or information provided from a department of welfare or 
zoning commission, at least 50 percent of the children residing in that 
area are eligible for free or reduced price school meals under the NSLP 
and the SBP; (3) A geographic area where a site demonstrates, based on 
other approved sources, that at least 50 percent of the children 
enrolled at the site are eligible for free or reduced price school 
meals under the NSLP and the SBP; or (4) A closed enrolled site in 
which at least 50 percent of the enrolled children at the site are 
eligible for free or reduced price school meals under the NSLP and the 
SBP, as determined by approval of applications in accordance with Sec.  
225.15(f). See, 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(1)(A) and Sec.  225.2. The definition 
of ``camps'' included in Sec.  225.2 ``means residential summer camps 
and nonresidential day camps which offer a regularly scheduled food 
service as part of an organized program for enrolled children. 
Nonresidential camp sites shall offer a continuous schedule of 
organized cultural or recreational programs for enrolled children 
between meal services.''
    FNS clarified in its implementation guidance for summer 2023 that 
sponsors may claim meals served to children who are eligible for free 
or reduced price school meals even if the rural area does not meet the 
definition of ``areas in which poor economic conditions exist.'' Non-
congregate meals may be served to children who are not eligible for 
free or reduced price meals in rural areas, but they may not be claimed 
for reimbursement. Therefore, this rule adds a definition for 
``conditional non-congregate site'' to codify this new site type and 
clarify applicable Program requirements.
    Accordingly, this rule adds the following definition in Sec.  225.2 
for ``conditional non-congregate site'' as a site which qualifies for 
Program participation because it conducts a non-congregate meal service 
for children eligible for free or reduced price meals in an area that 
does not meet the definition of ``areas in which poor economic 
conditions exist'' and is not a ``Camp'' as defined in Sec.  225.2.
iv. New Site
    FNS provides administrative and operational flexibilities for 
experienced sponsors and sites that have already operated the SFSP 
without significant operational problems. For example, when applying to 
participate in the Program, experienced sponsors are not required to 
submit the same level of detail regarding organizational and 
operational information required of new sponsors and those with 
previous operational problems. For new sponsors, and sponsors that 
experienced significant operational problems in the previous year, 
detailed information is required including, but not limited to, site 
information, arrangements for meeting health and safety standards, and 
budgets. This information is necessary for State agencies to determine 
if new sponsors and sites, or those with previous operational problems, 
are capable of administering the SFSP efficiently and effectively, and 
complying with all program requirements. Likewise, new sponsors and 
sites, and sponsors and sites that have experienced significant 
operational problems in the previous year, may be held to more rigorous 
levels of training and monitoring, at the State's discretion. To help 
clarify requirements for sponsors and sites with varying degrees of 
experience and/or success in operating the Program, Sec.  225.2 
contains definitions of ``new sponsor'', ``new site'', ``experienced 
sponsor'', and ``experienced site''.
    For summer 2023, USDA determined and communicated through guidance 
that experienced sites which proposed to operate non-congregate meal 
service for the first time, including those sites switching from a 
congregate meal service model to a non-congregate model or to operating 
a hybrid of both congregate and non-congregate models, were ``new'' 
sites. These sites were required to follow monitoring procedures for 
new sites. Through this rulemaking, USDA is codifying the summer 2023 
guidance, and requiring that all sites proposing to operate non-
congregate meal service for the first time to use procedures for new 
sites (see sections II. B. and F. for application and

[[Page 90238]]

monitoring procedures). Therefore, this rule revises the current 
definition of ``new site'' to reflect these changes. This rulemaking 
does not affect the experience determination for sponsors.
    Accordingly, this rule amends the definition of ``new site'' in 
Sec.  225.2 to clarify that experienced sites operating a non-
congregate meal service for the first time are considered new under the 
Program.
v. Site Supervisor and Operating Costs
    Under this rulemaking, USDA is also modifying existing definitions 
of ``site supervisor'' and ``operating costs'' in Sec.  225.2 to 
reflect the provision of non-congregate meal service under the Program.
    USDA published the final rule, Streamlining Program Requirements 
and Improving Integrity in the Summer Food Service Program (87 FR 
79213), on September 19, 2022, which added a definition in Sec.  225.2 
for ``site supervisor'' stating that the individual on site for the 
duration of the meal service, who has been trained by the sponsor, and 
is responsible for all administrative and management activities at a 
site including but not limited to: ordering meals, maintaining 
documentation of meal deliveries, ensuring that all meals served are 
safe, and maintaining accurate point of service meal counts.
    Therefore, with the new requirements established by the Act for 
non-congregate meal service, this rule amends the definition for ``site 
supervisor'' to mean the individual who has been trained by the sponsor 
and is responsible for all administrative and management activities at 
the site, including, but not limited to: maintaining documentation of 
meal deliveries, ensuring that all meals served are safe, and 
maintaining accurate point of service meal counts. Except for non-
congregate meal service sites using delivery services, the individual 
is on site for the duration of the food service.
    Program regulations in Sec.  225.2 define the term ``operating 
costs'' to mean the cost of operating a food service under the Program, 
including the: cost of obtaining food, labor directly involved in the 
preparation and service of food, cost of nonfood supplies, rental and 
use allowances for equipment and space, and cost of transporting 
children in rural areas to meal service sites in rural areas. This rule 
amends the definition for ``operating costs'' to include the costs to 
deliver non-congregate meals in rural areas under the Program as an 
allowable cost.
    Accordingly, this rule revises the definition of ``site 
supervisor'' and ``operating costs'' in Sec.  225.2 to reflect the 
provision of non-congregate meal service under the Program.
vi. Good Standing
    Under current Program regulations, there is no definition for good 
standing. The final rule, Streamlining Program Requirements and 
Improving Integrity in the Summer Food Service Program, 87 FR 57304, 
September 19, 2022, reflected on the qualities that contribute to a 
Program operator's successful performance. USDA indicated that an SFSP 
Program operator would be considered in ``good standing'' if it was 
reviewed by the State agency with no major Program findings or it had 
completed and implemented all corrective actions from the last 
compliance review. In addition, FNS intends to publish the proposed 
rule, Serious Deficiency Process in the Child and Adult Care Food 
Program (CACFP) and the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), RIN # 0584-
AE83, which will propose changes to the existing serious deficiency 
process in the CACFP for unaffiliated centers and establishes a serious 
deficiency process for the SFSP. As part of the rule, USDA will propose 
a new definition of ``good standing'' for SFSP. USDA recognizes that 
providing further clarification to determine what good standing means 
will benefit State agencies and program operators.
    USDA has determined that many of the requirements and allowable 
options codified at Sec.  225.16(i) for non-congregate meal service 
will only be allowed for sponsors in good standing, as discussed in 
section II. E. of this rule. However, good standing is not currently 
defined under Program regulations at Sec.  225.2. Therefore, in order 
to support State agency ability to determine if a sponsor is in good 
standing, this rule will codify ``good standing'' to mean the status of 
a program operator that meets its Program responsibilities, is current 
with its financial obligations, and, if applicable, has fully 
implemented all corrective actions within the required period of time. 
This definition mirrors the definition that will be proposed in Serious 
Deficiency Process in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and 
the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), RIN # 0584-AE83. USDA will 
review comments received on this definition both through the proposed 
rule, as well as through this rulemaking, and may further revise this 
definition as needed in future rulemaking.
    Accordingly, this rule adds a definition of ``good standing'' at 
Sec.  225.2.

B. State Agency Responsibilities

i. Department Notification
    Consistent with provisions under the NSLA at 42 U.S.C. 
1753(b)(1)(A) and 1761(a)(1)(D) and Program regulations at Sec.  
225.3(b), by November 1 each fiscal year each State agency must notify 
USDA regarding the State's intention to administer the Program in that 
fiscal year. Each State agency desiring to take part in the Program 
must enter into a written agreement with FNS for the administration of 
the Program. The Act amended section 13(n)(1) of the NSLA to require, 
for summer 2023 only, that each State desiring to participate in the 
Program must notify the USDA of its intent to administer the Program 
and must submit a management and administration plan (MAP) for the 
Program by April 1, 2023. In addition, the Act amended section 13(n)(2) 
of the NSLA to include that beginning in 2024, each State agency 
desiring to participate in the Program must notify the Department by 
January 1 of each year.
    Accordingly, this rule amends the regulatory deadline at Sec.  
225.3(b) for a State to notify the Department of its intent to 
administer the SFSP from November 1 to January 1 of each fiscal year. 
This rule also makes changes to the MAP requirements in Sec.  225.4, 
which are described in this section of the preamble. Finally, this rule 
establishes a requirement at Sec.  225.3(e) for State agencies 
administering the summer meal programs and Summer EBT Program to 
develop and implement a coordinated services plan for the programs in 
their State. This plan is a separate requirement from the MAP and is 
meant to coordinate the statewide availability of services offered 
through the Summer Food Service Program. See section IV. for discussion 
of those requirements.
ii. Program Management and Administration Plan
    Prior to the Act, provisions under the NSLA at 42 U.S.C. 
1753(b)(1)(A) and 1761(a)(1)(D) and Program regulations at Sec.  225.4 
required State agencies to submit a MAP for approval by February 15 for 
the current fiscal year (i.e., a plan that will cover program 
operations during the following summer). The State agency must include 
the State's administrative budget, an estimate of need for monies to 
pay for the cost of conducting health inspections, and the State's 
plans for use of Program funds (including providing technical 
assistance, monitoring, corrective action, fiscal integrity, and to 
ensure compliance with food service

[[Page 90239]]

management company procurement monitoring) in the MAP.
    The Act amended section 13(n)(1) of the NSLA to require that, for 
summer 2023, each State agency will have until April 1, 2023, to submit 
their MAP, which must include the State's plan for using non-congregate 
meal service, if applicable, including plans to provide a reasonable 
opportunity to access meals across all areas of the State, in addition 
to the MAP requirements previously required under the NSLA (i.e., the 
State's administrative budget for the fiscal year, an estimate of need 
for monies to pay for the cost of conducting health inspections, and 
the State's plan for the use of program funds, providing technical 
assistance, monitoring, taking timely action against program violators, 
certifying fiscal integrity, and to ensuring compliance with food 
service management company procurement monitoring). The summer 2023 
Program guidance provided State agencies additional information 
detailing the plans for implementation of non-congregate meal service 
in their MAP. This information included participation projections, 
sponsor information, plans for targeting and outreach, how State 
Administrative Funds (SAF) would be used to support non-congregate meal 
service for summer 2023, and strategies for providing technical 
assistance to ensure integrity requirements are met. Guidance also 
allowed State agency discretion to establish statewide policies 
regarding aspects of rural non-congregate meal service, based on past 
experiences gained during the COVID-19 pandemic. State agencies were 
required to include statewide details related to the non-congregate 
meal service option in the MAP. Summer 2023 MAP submissions indicated 
that two State agencies used statewide discretion to prohibit the use 
of the non-congregate meal service for summer 2023 operations to allow 
them to evaluate non-congregate processes in order to safeguard Program 
integrity.
    This rule codifies the amendments made to section 13(n)(2) of the 
NSLA, which provides that the MAP must include all provisions 
previously required under the NSLA, the new additional requirement 
under section 13(n)(1), and the State agency's plan for Program 
delivery in areas that could benefit the most from the provision of 
non-congregate meals. This includes the State's plan to identify rural 
areas with no congregate meal service, and plan to target priority 
areas for non-congregate meal service. A discussion of the provisions 
and an ``area with no congregate meal service'' is described further 
below. USDA understands that State agencies are best positioned to 
determine how non-congregate meal service may be conducted through 
sponsors to provide Program access to eligible children while 
maintaining Program accountability. Apart from the case-by-case 
determinations outlined in section II. E. of this rulemaking, State 
agencies should include any additional proposed statewide requirements 
or restrictions and operational safeguards as part of the State's plan 
to use non-congregate meal service in their MAP.
    Accordingly, this rule codifies non-congregate meal service 
requirements in the MAP by adding a new Sec.  225.4(d)(9) and (10). SAF 
as outlined in Sec.  225.5, may be requested based on projected program 
growth with the additional meals that will be served as a part of both 
congregate and non-congregate meal service. The SAF can be used to 
support outreach to service institutions and encourage participation in 
both congregate and non-congregate meal service, as well as 
implementation of program accountability and integrity efforts.
iii. Priorities and Outreach Mandate
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.6(a)(2) require that, by February 
1 of each fiscal year, each State agency must announce the purpose, 
eligibility criteria, and availability of the Program throughout the 
State, through appropriate means of communication. As a part of this 
effort, each State agency must identify rural areas, Indian Tribal 
territories, and areas with a concentration of migrant farm workers 
which qualify for the Program and actively seek eligible applicant 
sponsors to serve such areas. State agencies must identify priority 
outreach areas in accordance with USDA guidance and prioritize outreach 
efforts in these areas.
    The Act amended section 13(a)(13)(D) of the NSLA to require State 
agencies to identify areas with no congregate meal service that could 
benefit the most from the provision of non-congregate meals and 
encourage participating service institutions in those areas to provide 
non-congregate meals as appropriate. Accordingly, this rule amends 
program requirements at Sec.  225.6(a)(2) to reflect this new priority 
area for State agencies as required by statute. In addition, the rule 
revises the paragraph structure at Sec.  225.6(a)(2) to improve the 
clarity of the regulations.
iv. Application Requirements--Content of Sponsor Applications and Site 
Information Sheets
    Annually, each State agency must inform all the previous year's 
sponsors which meet current eligibility requirements, as well as all 
other potential sponsors, of the application deadline for Program 
participation. Program regulations at Sec.  225.6 outline State agency 
responsibilities when approving Program sponsors and sites. When 
reviewing applications, the State agency should consider the resources 
and capabilities of each applicant to sufficiently operate all proposed 
sites. This rule clarifies the State agency review requirements for the 
content of sponsor application and site application approval, which are 
discussed in this section.
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.6(g)(1) and (2) require that State 
agencies develop site information sheets for new or experienced sites 
where a food service is proposed. The site information sheets provide 
State agencies with the documentation needed to determine if the site 
can demonstrate administrative capability and financial viability to 
effectively operate a meal service. The site information sheet 
completed by the sponsor must demonstrate or describe the estimated 
number and types of meals to be served and times of service; 
documentation of eligibility; and, if the site qualifies as a camp, 
documentation of the number of children enrolled in the Program who 
meet the Program's income standards. New sites are also required to 
demonstrate or describe an organized and supervised system for serving 
meals to children; arrangements for delivery and holding of meals and 
storing leftovers for next day meal service to ensure food safety; 
arrangements for food service during periods of inclement weather; 
access to means of communication for making necessary adjustments for 
number of meals to be served at each site; whether the site is rural or 
non-rural; and whether the site's food service will be self-prepared or 
vended.
    Program regulations do not include site information specific to 
non-congregate meal service. Therefore, this rule modifies the minimum 
information that must be demonstrated or described on the site 
information sheets to reflect the provision of non-congregate meal 
service under the Program. This information provided in the site 
information sheet for new sponsors must describe an organized and 
supervised system for serving meals to children; whether the site is 
rural and the documentation supporting the rural designation as 
discussed later in this section; whether the meal service is congregate 
or non-congregate; and, if the site qualifies as a conditional non-
congregate site, documentation of the number of children enrolled in 
the

[[Page 90240]]

Program who meet the Program's income standards. For experienced sites, 
the site information sheets must include whether the meal service to be 
provided is congregate or non-congregate; whether the site is rural and 
documentation supporting the rural designation which is discussed later 
in this section; and, if the site qualifies as a conditional non-
congregate site, documentation of the number of children enrolled in 
the Program who meet the Program's income standards.
    As noted above, this rule is adding a documentation requirement for 
experienced sites to demonstrate that they are rural. Current 
regulations do not require that the site information sheet demonstrate 
or describe whether the site is rural for experienced sites, as 
required for new sites or sites with operational problems. This 
application requirement was removed for experienced sites under the 
Final Rule, Summer Food Service Program: Program Meal Service During 
the School Year, Paperwork Reduction, and Targeted State Monitoring (64 
FR 72889), to eliminate duplicative and unnecessary requirements for 
experienced sponsors, with the intent of reducing the paperwork 
associated with the application process for these sponsors. However, 
USDA has concluded that determining rurality is necessary for all 
Program sponsors due to the effect of a rural designation and non-
congregate participation. This rule also adds an effective period to 
the rural designation to establish the frequency at which sponsors must 
re-establish rural designation for non-congregate meal service sites, 
which is discussed in later in this section of the rule.
    In addition, USDA is codifying non-congregate meal service options 
under this IFR, as discussed in section II. E. ii. As part of those 
options, USDA will require integrity safeguards to prevent unallowable 
or duplicate meal distribution. Under this rule, sponsors opting to 
distribute multiple days' worth of meals must have procedures in place 
that document, to a reasonable extent, that the proper number of meals 
are distributed to each eligible child. In addition, sponsors opting to 
distribute meals to parents or guardians on behalf of children must 
have procedures in place to document that meals are only distributed to 
parents or guardians of eligible children and that duplicate meals are 
not distributed to any child. Therefore, this rule will require this 
information to be included in the applications for new sponsors, 
sponsors that have experienced significant operational problems in the 
prior year, and experienced sponsors.
    Accordingly, this rule adds a new Sec.  225.6(c)(2)(xi) and 
(3)(viii) to require that the application for new sponsors, sponsors 
that have experienced significant operational problems in the prior 
year, and experienced sponsors include procedures to document that 
meals are only distributed, to a reasonable extent, to eligible 
children and that duplicate meals are not distributed to any child, if 
the applicant sponsor is electing to use the non-congregate meal 
service options of multi-day meal issuance and parent or guardian meal 
pick-up. In addition, this rule amends Program regulations at Sec.  
225.6(g)(1)(iv) and(g)(2)(iii) to require sponsors to identify whether 
each meal service will be congregate or non-congregate. This rule also 
adds new Sec.  225.6(g)(1)(xiv) and (g)(2)(viii) to require Program 
sponsors who are operating conditional non-congregate sites to specify 
the number of children enrolled who meet the Program's income 
standards. In addition, this rule amends requirements at Sec.  
225.6(g)(1)(iii) and 225.6(g)(2)(ii) to establish whether a site is 
rural, and that documentation supporting the rural designation is 
required. This rule also establishes the frequency at which the site 
must re-establish rural designation, which is described later in this 
section of this rule. Due to the addition of the new requirements, the 
rule revises the subordinate paragraph numbering at Sec.  225.6(g)(1) 
and (2). Furthermore, this rule amends Sec.  225.6(b)(6) to include 
State agency requirements for sponsor application approval related to 
site reviews, as discussed in section II. F. of this rulemaking. 
Lastly, this rule clarifies the requirement at Sec.  225.6(g)(1)(v) 
with terms consistent with those defined in Sec.  225.2.
v. Approval of Sites and Determining No Congregate Meal Service
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.6(h) provide the site requirements 
that must be evaluated by the State agency before site approval is 
granted. Program regulations at Sec.  225.6(h)(1) require State 
agencies to ensure the proposed food service site is located in an 
``area in which poor economic conditions exist,'' or will serve 
specific groups of eligible children; the area which the site proposes 
to serve will not be served in whole or in part by another site, unless 
it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the State agency that 
each site will serve children not served by any other site in the same 
area for the same meal; the site is approved to serve no more than the 
number of children for which its facilities are adequate and; if it is 
a site proposed to operate during any unanticipated school closure, it 
is a non-school site. Regulations at Sec.  225.6(h)(2)(i), (ii), (iii), 
and (v) are specific to congregate meal service operations and require 
that each vended site must have an approved level for the maximum 
number of children's meals which may be served under the Program, which 
is commonly known as a ``site cap.''
    Summer 2023 Program guidance provided specific requirements that 
the State agency must follow when approving Program sites to operate 
non-congregate meal service. Those requirements included:
    <bullet> The proposed non-congregate meal service site must be in a 
rural area;
    <bullet> The area proposing to be served will not be served by a 
congregate meal service; and
    <bullet> Safeguards must be implemented to ensure children will not 
receive more than the maximum allowance of summer meals per day.
    All existing application and approval requirements, including the 
priority system when approving applicants to operate sites that propose 
to serve the same area or the same enrolled children (7 CFR 
225.6(b)(5)) and site cap requirements, continued to apply for both 
congregate and non-congregate meal service. In addition, summer 2023 
guidance also included considerations when determining if an area was 
already being served by a congregate site. This guidance allowed for 
State agency discretion when approving sites for non-congregate meal 
service, if they ensured adherence to the requirements provided above, 
but with the caveat that State agencies may not deny a site based 
solely on the sponsor's intent to provide a non-congregate meal 
service. Sites that served the same children on different days, 
different weeks, or for different meals on the same day could provide a 
combination of congregate and non-congregate meal service if the State 
agency could ensure that the congregate and non-congregate sites would 
not serve the same population of children for the same meal service on 
the same day. Summer 2023 guidance also allowed congregate sites that 
existed prior to that time to switch from congregate to non-congregate 
meal service. However, the Department encouraged State agencies and 
sponsors to work to identify and prioritize those rural areas that the 
congregate Program cannot reliably reach.
    USDA received mixed feedback from stakeholders related to defining 
an area with no congregate meal service. Some stakeholders suggested 
setting parameters for an ``area with no congregate meal service,'' 
such as a

[[Page 90241]]

specified distance from congregate sites. Other stakeholders suggested 
that an ``area with no congregate meal service'' should be left to 
State agency discretion, since Program operations vary across States. 
One stakeholder suggested requiring sponsors to provide an integrity 
plan prior to site approval to avoid meal duplication.
    This final rule incorporates new statutory requirements and summer 
2023 Program guidance with additional regulatory clarifications as to 
how to determine areas with no congregate meal service.
    First, in accordance with summer 2023 guidance which stated that 
State agencies may not deny a site based solely on the sponsor's intent 
to provide a non-congregate meal service, USDA is adding a new Sec.  
225.6(b)(12) to require that the State agency must not deny a sponsor's 
application based solely on the sponsor's intent to provide a non-
congregate meal service.
    Second, this rule amends Program regulations at Sec.  
225.6(h)(1)(i) to require that the proposed site will serve an ``area 
in which poor economic conditions exist,'' unless it is a conditional 
non-congregate site, as discussed in this rulemaking. This rule also 
amends Sec.  225.6(h)(2) to clarify that each vended site must have an 
approved level for the maximum number of children's meals which may be 
served under the Program as they relate to congregate and non-
congregate meal service.
    Third, this rule adds a new Sec.  225.6(h)(3) to address the 
elements of the proposed site operations that the State agency must 
ensure when approving the application of sites to provide non-
congregate meal service. Under this rulemaking, the State agency must 
ensure that the proposed site: is rural; will only distribute the 
allowable number of reimbursable meals that would be provided over a 
10-calendar day period, although the State agency may establish a 
shorter calendar day period on a case-by-case basis and without regard 
to sponsor type (as described in section II. E.); serves an area in 
which poor economic conditions exist or is approved for reimbursement 
only for meals served free to enrolled children who meet the Program's 
income standards; and will not serve an area where children would 
receive the same meal at an approved congregate meal site, unless it 
can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the State agency that the 
site will serve a different group of children who may not be otherwise 
served. Also, as discussed in sections II. A. and F., this rule 
clarifies that all sites proposing to operate non-congregate meal 
service for the first time must use procedures for new sites. The rule 
reflects this regulatory change by adding a requirement that the State 
agency must ensure that the sponsor follows the site information sheet 
requirements at Sec.  225.6(g)(1) for new sites, where a non-congregate 
food service operation is proposed for the first time.
    Fourth, this rule adds a new Sec.  225.6(h)(4) to address the 
elements of the proposed site operations that the State agency must 
ensure when approving the application of a site which will provide both 
a congregate meal service and a non-congregate meal service, 
effectively allowing State agencies to approve sites which will operate 
both meal services, with some restrictions to ensure the non-congregate 
meal service does not compete with or duplicate the congregate meal 
service. This includes regulations to require the State agency to 
ensure that the proposed site will only conduct a non-congregate meal 
service when the site is not providing a congregate meal service, and 
that the sponsor has a system in place to prevent meal service overlap 
when providing a congregate and non-congregate meal service at the same 
site to reasonably ensure children are not receiving more than the 
daily maximum allowance of meals. Note that for sites that operate both 
congregate and non-congregate service, it is not considered a meal 
service overlap if the site provides a congregate breakfast and then a 
non-congregate lunch intended to be consumed at a later time offsite 
(for example). Finally, the new requirements for approving sites 
operating a non-congregate meal service are in addition to the existing 
program requirements at Sec.  225.6(h)(1) and (2).
    Some stakeholders requested that USDA establish more specific 
criteria or standards to define ``an area with no congregate meal 
service.'' However, USDA agrees with the majority of stakeholders who 
suggested that USDA allow some discretion for State agencies to 
consider operational and environmental factors, which may vary by 
location. USDA also determined that providing discretion would avoid 
introducing complexity into the regulations and allow necessary 
flexibility to support successful implementation. USDA intends to 
provide additional guidance and technical assistance to support 
implementation of this provision.
    Accordingly, this IFR adds a new Sec.  225.6(b)(12) to require that 
the State agency must not deny a sponsor's application based solely on 
the sponsor's intent to provide a non-congregate meal service. The IFR 
also makes the following amendments to Sec.  225.6(h):
    <bullet> Amends Program regulations at Sec.  225.6(h)(1)(i) to 
include conditional non-congregate sites.
    <bullet> Adds a new Sec.  225.6(h)(3) and (4) to include site 
application approval requirements that State agencies must ensure when 
evaluating the proposed site which will provide a non-congregate meal 
service and determining an ``area with no congregate meal service.''
    <bullet> Revises terminology used in Sec.  225.6(h)(2) to clarify 
the applicability of regulations to both congregate and non-congregate 
meal services.
vi. Duration of Rural Designation
    The Act authorized non-congregate meal service in ``rural areas 
where no congregate meal service is available.'' Currently, no 
effective period is established in statute, regulations, or guidance 
for rural designations. As discussed in section II. B. iv. of this 
rule, current Federal regulations do not require an experienced site to 
demonstrate it is rural as part of the site information sheets. 
However, USDA concluded that determining rurality is a necessary 
documentation submission, regardless of the level of site or sponsor 
experience, due to the significant effect of a rural designation under 
the non-congregate provision added by the Act. Therefore, this rule 
adds a new documentation requirement for experienced sites (discussed 
at section II. B. iv.) and establishes the frequency at which the site 
must re-establish its rural designation.
    This rule codifies the requirement that Program sponsors re-
determine their sites' rural designations every 5 years. Once a site is 
established as rural based on the rural definition in Program 
regulations at Sec.  225.2, the rural status is effective for a period 
of 5 years from the date of determination. At the discretion of the 
State agency, redetermination prior to the 5-year period may be 
required, if the State agency determines that an area's rural status 
has changed significantly since the previous determination.
    USDA evaluated the effective period for similar application 
documentation requirements (such as area eligibility) as well as the 
frequency in which the allowable rural data sources are updated. Using 
this information, USDA determined a streamlined approach to minimize 
administrative burden. Standards, classifications, and delineations of 
rural data sources allowed under summer 2023 and moving forward (see 
section II.A.ii.) are updated with each decennial census

[[Page 90242]]

and periodically based on annual census surveys. Although more frequent 
redeterminations may more accurately and timely capture changes to an 
area's rural status, particularly during periods that overlap with 
census years, USDA concludes that shorter effective periods for rural 
designation may be too burdensome and are unnecessary for State 
agencies and Program operators.
    Accordingly, this rule adds language at Sec.  225.6(g)(1)(iii) and 
(g)(2)(ii) to require new documentation of rural designation every 5 
years, or earlier, if the State agency believes that an area's rural 
status has changed significantly since the previous determination.
vii. Clarifications to Existing Requirements: Free Meal Policy 
Statement, State-Sponsor Agreement, and Corrective Action Procedures
    This rule clarifies existing requirements in Sec. Sec.  225.6 and 
225.11, which fall under the purview of the State agency. These 
clarifications reflect the provision of non-congregate meal service 
under the Program, specifically in response to the addition of the new 
site type, conditional non-congregate site, as defined under this 
rulemaking.
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.6 require that State agencies 
provide and obtain specific information regarding a sponsor's meal 
service sites. Regulations at Sec.  225.6(f) require that as part of 
the free meal policy statement, sponsors must submit a 
nondiscrimination statement of their policy for serving meals to 
children. This rule clarifies that sponsors operating conditional non-
congregate sites are exempt from including a statement that meals 
served are free at all sites. In addition, the rule clarifies that 
sponsors operating conditional non-congregate sites that charge 
separately for meals must also include specific eligibility information 
in the policy statement, and that each sponsor of a conditional non-
congregate site must submit a copy of its hearing procedures with its 
application.
    Furthermore, Program regulations at Sec.  225.6(i) require that a 
sponsor approved for Program participation must enter into a written 
agreement with the State agency. Under the requirements in which all 
sponsors must agree to in writing, the rule clarifies that a sponsor of 
sites operating as conditional non-congregate sites are excepted from 
serving meals without cost to all children and may charge for meals 
served to children who do not meet the Program's income standards. 
These sponsors may claim reimbursement only for meals served to 
children who meet the Program's income standards. In addition, the rule 
clarifies that the requirement to maintain children on site while meals 
are consumed only applies for sponsors providing a congregate meal 
service. Finally, this rule revises the language at Sec.  225.6(i) to 
reflect the definition of ``termination for convenience'' that will be 
proposed in Serious Deficiency Process in the Child and Adult Care Food 
Program (CACFP) and the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), RIN # 0584-
AE83. Program regulations at Sec.  225.6(i) allow the State agency or 
sponsor to terminate the agreement at its convenience, for 
considerations unrelated to the sponsor's performance of Program 
responsibilities under the agreement. USDA is revising this language to 
clarify that the State agency or sponsor may terminate the agreement at 
its convenience, upon mutual agreement, due to considerations unrelated 
to either party's performance of Program responsibilities under the 
agreement. USDA will review comments received on this definition both 
through the proposed rule, as well as through this rulemaking, and may 
further revise this terminology as needed in future rulemaking.
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.11 require the State agency to use 
corrective action procedures to improve Program performance, such as 
investigations, denial of applications and termination of sponsors, 
meal service restrictions, meal disallowances, corrective action and 
termination of sites, and technical assistance for improved meal 
service. This rule clarifies that the serious deficiencies of the 
simultaneous service of more than one meal to any child and excessive 
instances of off-site meal consumption outlined in Program regulations 
at Sec.  225.11 (c)(4)(iv) and (viii), respectively, are specific to 
congregate meal service operations. Also, as discussed in section II. 
B. v. and section II. E. i. of this rule, non-congregate meals must be 
served according to the number and type of meals allowed for the site 
type at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(3), and sponsors must implement an organized 
and supervised system which prevents overlap between meal services to 
reasonably ensure children are not receiving more than the daily 
maximum allowance of meals. Therefore, USDA is adding a new Program 
violation that is specific to non-congregate meal service to the list 
outlined at Sec.  225.11(c)(4). Under this IFR, for non-congregate meal 
service operations, distributing more than the daily meal limit when 
multi-day service is used is considered a serious deficiency which is 
grounds for disapproval of applications and for termination when the 
violation is recorded at a significant proportion of the sponsor's 
sites.
    In addition, Program regulations at Sec.  225.11(d) require that, 
with the exception of residential camps, the State agency must restrict 
to one meal service per day any site determined to be in violation of 
the time restrictions for meal service set forth at Sec.  225.16(c) 
when corrective action is not taken within a reasonable time, and all 
sites under a sponsor if more than 20 percent of the sponsor's sites 
are determined to be in violation of the time restrictions set. The 
regulations also require the State agency to make a reasonable effort 
to locate another source of meal service for these children if this 
action results in children not receiving meals under the Program. Given 
the exceptions to the meal service time requirements for non-congregate 
meal service provided through this rulemaking (see section II. E.), and 
that restricting non-congregate sites to one meal service per day could 
impact children served by that site, this rule clarifies that non-
congregate meal service sites are also excepted from the meal service 
restrictions at Sec.  225.11(d).
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.6(f) to clarify 
nondiscrimination and hearing procedures statement requirements for 
non-congregate meal service. Additionally, this rule amends Sec.  
225.6(i) introductory text, (i)(4), (i)(7)(i) and (ii), and (i)(15) to 
clarify State-sponsor agreement requirements for sites that provide 
non-congregate meal service. Lastly, this rule amends Sec.  
225.11(c)(4) and (d) to clarify corrective action procedures as they 
relate to congregate and non-congregate meal service.

C. Requirements for Sponsor Participation

i. Sponsor Eligibility
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.14 outline requirements for 
sponsor participation. The requirements include application procedures, 
sponsor eligibility, and demonstration of administrative and financial 
ability to manage a food service effectively. Sponsor eligibility is 
limited to public or private nonprofit SFAs; public or private 
nonprofit residential summer camps; units of local, municipal, county, 
Tribal, or State governments; public or private nonprofit colleges or 
universities which are currently participating in the National Youth 
Sports Program; and private nonprofit organizations as defined in Sec.  
225.2 and outlined at Sec.  225.14(b). Additionally, Program 
regulations at Sec.  225.14(d) provide requirements that are specific 
to

[[Page 90243]]

sponsor types, such as camps. The Act requires State agencies to 
encourage participating service institutions in rural areas with no 
congregate meal service to provide non-congregate meals as appropriate.
    Summer 2023 guidance allowed any service institution that met the 
definition of sponsor in Program regulations at Sec.  225.2 to 
participate in the non-congregate meal service option with State agency 
approval, including sponsors new to the Program. Camps were also 
allowed to participate, though guidance acknowledged that regulations 
require camps to provide a regularly scheduled food service as part of 
an organized program for enrolled children, and such programming is 
generally understood to be congregate in nature. Furthermore, Summer 
2023 guidance instructed that to participate, experienced sponsors must 
be considered in ``good standing.'' However, sponsors that have 
experienced serious deficiencies in prior years may be approved to 
operate non-congregate meal service if, to the satisfaction of the 
State agency, all appropriate corrective actions to prevent recurrence 
of the deficiencies were taken as outlined in Program regulations at 
Sec.  225.6(b)(9).
    USDA received stakeholder feedback that expressed integrity 
concerns related to non-congregate meal service provided by community 
sponsors in recent years, most notably during non-congregate meal 
service operations provided during the COVID-19 pandemic. Several State 
agencies expressed more confidence in SFAs' ability to operate non-
congregate meal service as compared to other program sponsors due to 
their familiarity with NSLP and SBP meal service operations, as well as 
potential greater logistical capacity. One stakeholder commented that 
in their State only SFA sponsors were allowed to operate non-congregate 
meal service. However, three State agencies and four additional 
stakeholders emphasized the need to maintain access when considering 
important integrity measures. Finally, USDA did not receive direct 
feedback on camp (as defined at Sec.  225.2) participation from 
stakeholders. A limited number of State agencies reported that they did 
not include camps in non-congregate service this summer due to their 
interpretation that such sites are inherently congregate in nature.
    Program sponsors who provide year-round meal service have 
consistent program operations and thus are more readily able to 
demonstrate administrative capabilities than sponsors who only operate 
during the summer period. Although several stakeholders expressed 
concern for certain sponsor types operating a non-congregate meal 
service, USDA concludes that all service institutions listed under 
requirements at Sec.  225.14(b) are eligible to sponsor the Program, 
including providing congregate and non-congregate meal services, and 
thus, this rulemaking establishes no restrictions on providing non-
congregate meal service based on sponsor type. This decision is based 
on the need to maintain program access and support the stipulation that 
all sponsors considered in good standing and who meet all other program 
requirements should have the opportunity to provide non-congregate meal 
service. This decision also pertains to public or nonprofit private 
residential summer camps. As defined in 7 CFR 225.2, camps must provide 
a regularly scheduled food service as part of an organized program for 
enrolled children, and as mentioned above, such programming is 
generally understood to be congregate in nature. However, USDA 
recognizes that there may be situations where it makes sense to allow a 
camp to operate a non-congregate meal service for their enrolled 
children, such as service of the third meal if a congregate meal 
service is not provided, or meals provided to be consumed over the 
weekend while an enrolled child is in an active camp session, but 
during which there are no congregate meals provided. USDA encourages 
State agencies to work with potential sponsors of all types to 
determine how their proposed site(s) and operations can best serve 
communities in identified rural areas that could benefit the most from 
the provision of non-congregate meals and fill in gaps in service.
    Accordingly, this rule makes no regulatory changes to existing 
sponsor eligibility requirements Sec.  225.14(b), effectively allowing 
all service institutions listed under requirements at Sec.  225.14(b) 
to be eligible to sponsor the Program, including operating both 
congregate and non-congregate meal services. Although USDA is not 
making changes to sponsor eligibility, this rule limits some meal 
service options to sponsors in good standing and retains the meal 
service option of offer versus serve to SFAs, as discussed in section 
II. E. of this rule.
i. Clarifications to Existing Requirements: General Requirements at 
Sec.  225.14(c)
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.14(c)(3) require that, to be 
eligible to participate in the SFSP, applicant sponsors must conduct a 
regularly scheduled food service for children in areas in which poor 
economic conditions exist or must qualify as a camp. With the 
establishment of the non-congregate option in eligible rural areas, 
conditional non-congregate sites, as defined under this rulemaking, can 
also provide a regularly scheduled food service for children in non-
area eligible locations.
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.14(c)(3) to clarify this 
qualification for applicant sponsors which will operate a conditional 
non-congregate site.

D. Responsibilities of Sponsors

i. Identification and Determination of Eligible Children
    As discussed in the background section of this rule, for summer 
2023 non-congregate meal service operations, the Act allowed State 
agencies to use service models developed for demonstration projects 
carried out under section 749(g) of the Agriculture, Rural Development, 
Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 
2010 (Pub. L. 111-80; 123 Stat. 2132). Summer 2023 guidance allowed 
home delivery and meal pick-up options as provided in past 
demonstrations. The home delivery model allowed for non-congregate 
meals to be delivered directly to homes of participants. Program 
guidance required that sponsors approved to provide non-congregate meal 
service through home delivery must be able to identify and invite 
households of eligible children to participate in the meal delivery 
service. The guidance also required that sponsors obtain written 
consent from the eligible child's parent or guardian that the household 
wants to receive delivered meals. Written consent could include hard 
copy, email, or other electronic means of communication. Furthermore, 
sponsors were required to confirm the household's current contact 
information and the number of eligible children in the household to 
ensure the correct number of meals were delivered to the correct 
location.
    In addition, Summer 2023 Program guidance required non-SFA sponsors 
that planned to obtain individual children's program eligibility 
information through free and reduced price school meal eligibility data 
to enter into a written agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) 
with an SFA. However, non-SFA sponsors could also use the household 
application procedures outlined in Program regulations at Sec.  
225.15(f) to identify eligible children in non-area eligible areas 
instead of entering into a

[[Page 90244]]

written agreement or MOU with the local SFA. Lastly, sponsors were 
required to protect the confidentiality of participants and their 
households throughout the process in accordance with confidentiality 
and disclosure provisions in the NSLA and Program regulations at Sec.  
225.15(f) through (l). These home delivery requirements were also 
implemented during non-congregate meal service during COVID-19 
operations.
    In the listening sessions held to inform this rule, stakeholders 
shared challenges with the home delivery model when providing non-
congregate meal service, particularly, concerns with delivering Program 
meals when participants are not home. USDA heard from stakeholders that 
communication with participating families was imperative to home 
delivery operations. Several stakeholders explained that obtaining 
delivery signatures or asking parents to provide delivery instructions 
worked well in their State. Another stakeholder suggested text 
notifications or reminders to participating families about meal 
deliveries would be helpful to confirm someone was home to receive the 
meals, and thus ensure a smoother delivery and reduced food waste. In 
addition, several stakeholders reported the importance of protecting 
student data by requiring a MOU to receive student eligibility data 
from a local SFA. One stakeholder requested USDA allow non-profit 
sponsors to provide home delivery without requiring an MOU with an SFA, 
and that limiting home delivery to students identified through an MOU 
with an SFA excludes students who are homeschooled or in virtual school 
as well as families with children not yet in school. Finally, 
stakeholders also reported concerns with overt identification of those 
children who are eligible to receive free and reduced price meals when 
providing home delivered meals in non-area eligible areas.
    USDA agrees with stakeholders that communication with participating 
families and protecting participants' right to confidentiality is 
imperative to Program integrity and operations. Therefore, through this 
rulemaking, USDA is codifying summer 2023 guidance for obtaining 
written parental consent for home delivery. This rule requires sponsors 
that provide meals directly to children's homes to obtain written 
parental consent prior to providing home delivered meals to children. 
While USDA sought to minimize burden on program operators and 
participants wherever feasible, the Agency determined that obtaining 
written consent prior to delivering meals to private residences is the 
only reasonable approach for setting up delivery service with basic 
integrity safeguards. Establishing both the presence of children in 
each household as well as the household's consent to receive meals is 
critical to ensuring Program integrity, and preventing any unnecessary 
financial burden, time burden, and potential for food waste, as well as 
possible convenience for households. However, USDA appreciates that up-
front time and resource investment associated with obtaining consent 
and up-to-date information from households, and seeks comments on 
effective strategies to streamline this process and ensure validity of 
household information.
    USDA is also codifying the requirement that non-SFA sponsors must 
enter into a written agreement or MOU with the State agency or local 
SFA to receive student data for identification and eligibility 
determinations. Program regulations at Sec.  225.15(k) require that the 
State agency or sponsor, as appropriate, should have a written 
agreement or MOU with programs or individuals receiving eligibility 
information, prior to disclosing children's free and reduced price meal 
eligibility information. The agreement or MOU should include 
information like that required for disclosures to Medicaid and the 
Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) specified in Program 
regulations at Sec.  225.15(k)(2). Sponsors are responsible for the 
proper handling and storage of student data with applicable SFAs in 
accordance with confidentiality and disclosure provisions in the NSLA 
and SFSP regulations (Sec.  225.15(f) through (l)). Program sponsors 
should consider safeguards to protect participant confidentiality prior 
to implementation of the non-congregate meal service option. USDA 
reiterates that sponsors are not limited to using school data or 
providing meals to students identified through school data. Both 
congregate and non-congregate Program sponsors may use household 
applications or other means, such as household's receipt of SNAP, 
TANIF, and FDPIR benefits (as described in 7 CFR 225.15(f)(3)) to 
identify and notify children in the area of the option to receive meal 
deliveries, including students who are homeschooled or in virtual 
school as well as families with children not yet in school. 
Requirements regarding applications for free Program meals outlined at 
Sec.  225.15(f) must be followed when using household applications to 
determine the eligibility of children.
    Accordingly, this rule adds new Sec. Sec.  225.14(d)(6) and 
225.16(b)(5)(i) to require sponsors operating a non-congregate meal 
service which delivers meals directly to children's homes to obtain 
written parental consent prior to providing meals to the children. In 
addition, this rule adds a new Sec.  225.14(d)(8) to establish the 
requirement that non-SFA sponsors must enter into a written agreement 
or MOU with the State agency or local SFA if they wish to receive 
student data for identification and eligibility determination purposes.
i. Meal Ordering and Second Meals
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.15(b)(4) allow sponsors to claim 
reimbursement for several second meals which does not exceed 2 percent 
of the number of first meals served to children for each meal type 
(i.e., breakfasts, lunches, snacks, or suppers) during the claiming 
period. This option is provided in recognition of the fluctuation in 
participation during summer operations which makes forecasting 
difficult. The State agency must disallow all claims for second meals 
if it determines that the sponsor failed to plan and prepare or order 
meals with the objective of providing only one meal per child at each 
meal service. Second meals must be served only after all participating 
children at the site's meal service have been served a meal. Summer 
2023 Program policy only allowed second meals to be claimed at 
congregate meal sites. In this rule, USDA maintains its determination 
that the purpose and design of the non-congregate meal service option 
does not support the basis for claiming second meals at non-congregate 
meal service sites.
    Accordingly, this rule amends Program regulations at Sec.  
225.15(b)(4) to limit reimbursement of second meals to congregate meal 
service. State agencies must disallow claims if it determines sponsors 
served second meals as part of a non-congregate meal service.
i. Requirements Specific to Sponsors Operating Conditional Non-
Congregate Sites
    As stated in the section II. A. of this rule, USDA is defining 
conditional non-congregate sites under this rulemaking and clarifying 
applicable program requirements. This section describes the changes and 
clarifications USDA is making for this new site type as it relates to 
Sponsor responsibilities.

[[Page 90245]]

1. Certification To Collect Information on Participant Eligibility
    As is discussed throughout this section of the rule, sponsors of 
conditional non-congregate sites may only claim meals served to 
children who meet the Program's income standards. Program regulations 
at Sec.  225.14(d) provide requirements for specific sponsor types, 
such as sponsors that operate camp sites, and States that those sponsor 
types must certify that they will collect information on children's 
Program eligibility to support their claim for reimbursement. 
Accordingly, this IFR adds a new Sec.  225.14(d)(7) to clarify that if 
the sponsor operates a conditional non-congregate site, it must certify 
that it will collect information on participants' eligibility to 
support its claim for reimbursement.
2. Notification to the Community
    Summer 2023 guidance required sponsors of non-congregate meal 
service sites to announce the availability of free meals in the local 
media as outlined in Program regulations at Sec.  225.15(e). Program 
regulations at Sec.  225.15(e) require sponsors operating the SFSP, 
including sponsors of open sites, camps, and closed enrolled sites, to 
annually announce the availability of free meals in the media serving 
the area from which the sponsor draws its attendance. Sponsors of camps 
and closed enrolled sites must notify participants of the availability 
of free meals and if a free meal application is needed. The regulations 
specify that for sites that use free meal applications to determine 
individual eligibility, the notification to the community must include 
the Program's income eligibility standards, a statement explaining that 
certain children (such as children in households that receive SNAP) are 
automatically eligible to receive free meal benefits at eligible 
Program sites, and a statement that meals are available without regard 
to race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. USDA reminds 
State agencies and program operators that, despite the introduction of 
new SFSP regulations in this IFR, the requirement to provide reasonable 
modifications to accommodate participants with disabilities remains 
unchanged. With the addition of the new conditional non-congregate site 
type to Program regulations, USDA is amending Program requirements at 
Sec.  225.15(e) to clarify that sponsors of conditional non-congregate 
sites must notify participants of the availability of free meals and if 
a free meal application is needed, as with sponsors of camps and closed 
enrolled sites. Program regulations at Sec.  225.15(e) continue to 
apply to sponsors regardless of the meal service type provided.
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.15(e) to clarify 
notification requirements for sponsors of conditional non-congregate 
sites. This IFR also revises the language at Sec.  225.15(e) to reflect 
the current federally protected bases for the CNPs, as discussed in 
section II. H. of this rule.

E. Non-Congregate Meal Service

i. Non-Congregate Meal Service Requirements
    Under the SFSP, meals which may be served to children are 
breakfast, lunch, supper, and snacks. A sponsor may claim reimbursement 
only for the types of meals the sponsor is approved to serve under its 
agreement with the State agency. Sponsors' food service sites may be 
approved to serve any combination of two meals or one meal and one 
snack during each day of operation, except that lunch and supper cannot 
be served on the same day. In addition, sites that serve meals 
primarily to migrant children (commonly referred to as ``migrant 
sites'' under the Program) or camps may serve up to three meals 
(breakfast, lunch, and supper), or two meals and one snack, during each 
day of operation. A sponsor may only be reimbursed for meals that meet 
the meal pattern requirements, adhere to State and local health, 
safety, and sanitation requirements, and which are served during the 
approved meal service times, among other meal service requirements at 
Sec.  225.16. The Act added additional provisions specific to non-
congregate feeding, which USDA is codifying into regulations through 
this rulemaking.
    The NSLA was amended to allow States to provide program meals under 
the SFSP for non-congregate consumption in a rural area with no 
congregate meal service, as determined by the Secretary. In addition, 
under the new non-congregate provision, meals may only be claimed when 
served to children in an area in which poor economic conditions exist, 
or, in an area that is not an area in which poor economic conditions 
exist, if the child is determined to be eligible for free or reduced 
price school meals under the NSLP or the SBP. Finally, as with any meal 
served for congregate consumption, non-congregate meals must be served 
according to the number and type of meals allowed for the site type, 
and must meet all applicable State, Tribal, and local health, safety, 
and sanitation standards, and the nutritional standards prescribed 
under the Program meal pattern.
    Accordingly, this rule adds a new Sec.  225.16(b)(5) to codify the 
additional meal service requirements for non-congregate meals, in 
accordance with the statute. In addition, the rule reiterates pertinent 
existing requirements that continue to apply to non-congregate meal 
service, including restrictions on the number and type of meals served 
per operational day, and provisions that sponsors must only be approved 
to operate if they have the administrative and operational capability 
to do so. This rule makes further changes to the meal service 
requirements in Sec.  225.16, which are described in this section of 
the preamble.
ii. Non-Congregate Meal Service Options
    Under summer 2023 guidance, USDA allowed meal service options 
specific to non-congregate feeding including, but not limited to: 
multi-day meal issuance; parent or guardian meal pick-up; and bulk meal 
components. Based on stakeholder feedback, experience gained under 
COVID-19 operations, and summer 2023 implementation, USDA is codifying 
the use of these three specified options. The rule also includes 
several integrity safeguards, as well as parameters around State agency 
approval to use these options through this rulemaking. First, these 
meal service options may only be used by sponsors in good standing 
(good standing is discussed in section II. A. vi. of this rule), as 
determined by the State agency. Furthermore, a State agency may 
prohibit sponsors from using these options only on a case-by-case basis 
and without regard to sponsor type if the State agency determines that 
a sponsor does not have the capability to operate or oversee non-
congregate meal services at their sites. Finally, a State agency's 
decision to prohibit a sponsor from using an option is not an 
appealable action.
    This flexible approach promotes integrity while ensuring that 
sponsors who have demonstrated the administrative capability to carry 
out these options, are able to use these options as part of a non-
congregate meal service to meet the needs of the children in their 
area. Maintaining such access is critical for rural areas which may 
benefit from the use of these options where children would otherwise 
have to travel long distances to receive a meal.
    USDA understands that State agencies are best positioned to 
determine how sponsors may conduct non-congregate meal service to 
provide Program access

[[Page 90246]]

for eligible children while maintaining Program accountability. USDA 
encourages State agencies and sponsors to implement safeguards to 
ensure food safety and Program integrity. State agencies should include 
any additional statewide requirements and operational safeguards as 
part of the State's plan to use non-congregate meal service, as 
required for MAPs under this rulemaking (see section II. B. ii. of this 
rule).
    Accordingly, this IFR adds a new Sec.  225.16(i) to establish the 
use of these options for non-congregate meal service. A discussion of 
each of the provisions, stakeholder feedback, and USDA's actions and 
rationale for each of these options is included below.
1. Multi-Day Meal Issuance
    Program regulations under part 225 reflect the long-standing 
congregate meal service requirements of the NSLA. Provisions of the 
NSLA at 42 U.S.C. 1753(b)(1)(A) and 1761(a)(1)(D) and Program 
regulations at Sec.  225.6(i)(15) require Program meals to be served in 
a congregate setting and consumed by participants on site in order to 
be eligible for reimbursement. The NSLA further requires at 42 U.S.C. 
1761(b)(2) that a service institution may only serve up to two meals 
(or one snack and one meal) per day, per child (except for camps and 
migrant sites which may serve up to three meals (or two meals and one 
snack) per day, per child). However, the Act added section 13(a)(13)(E) 
[42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(13)(E)] to the NSLA which provides the option to 
provide multi-day meal distribution at rural non-congregate sites. 
Specifically, it allows that over a 10-calendar day period, the number 
of reimbursable non-congregate meals provided to a child does not 
exceed the number of meals that could be provided over a 10-calendar 
day period under congregate feeding. Under summer 2023 guidance, USDA 
did not establish further Federal limitations and allowed State 
agencies, at their discretion, to approve sponsors for multi-day 
distribution of meals that could be provided over a 10-calendar day 
period, consistent with the statute.
    During COVID-19 operations, about 30 percent of State agencies 
reported that more than half of Program sponsors provided 2 to 3 days' 
worth of meals at one time. In addition, about one fourth of State 
agencies reported that more than half of these local Program sponsors 
provided a full week of meals at one time.\6\ Through the listening 
sessions, USDA received varied feedback from stakeholders regarding the 
multi-day meal issuance option when used for non-congregate meal 
service during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of the comments focused on 
the difficulty of balancing Program integrity with Program access. Some 
stakeholders, including a few State agencies, stated that multi-day 
meal issuance is an essential method of providing non-congregate meals 
in rural areas and praised the benefits to the community, such as the 
ability to provide children meals for the weekend. Though, stakeholders 
expressed concerns about food safety or food quality when multiple days 
of meals are provided at one time, as well as providers' and 
households' storage capabilities. Many State agencies reported limiting 
multi-day meal issuance to no more than 5- or 7-days during summer 
2023, while other State agencies reported prohibiting multi-day meal 
issuance for all sponsors due to operational challenges experienced 
during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some State agencies noted that they 
permitted the maximum number of days' worth of meals allowed (i.e., 10 
calendar days) when sponsors provided a valid rationale or a food 
safety plan. Acknowledging some State agencies' concerns with multi-day 
meal issuance, one stakeholder suggested USDA provide State agencies a 
tiered system based on a risk assessment to determine the number of 
days' worth of meals that a sponsor or site can distribute at one time. 
This tiered system could include years of operation (total and 
utilizing non-congregate service), prior review findings, degree of 
remoteness of the service area, and presence of other sites in the 
vicinity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Severn, Veronica, Liana Washburn, Rachel Frisk, and Kevin 
Conway. (2023). Child Nutrition Program Operations During the COVID-
19 Pandemic, March through September 2020: School Meals Operations 
Study (SMO) Year 1 Report. Prepared by Mathematica, Contract No. 
12319819A0009/12319819F0162. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Policy Support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rule codifies into regulations the provision at section 
13(a)(13)(E) of the NSLA, as amended by the Act, which requires that 
the number of reimbursable meals provided to a child does not exceed 
the number of meals that could be provided over a 10-calendar day 
period. However, the State agency may establish a shorter calendar day 
period on a case-by-case basis for an individual sponsor, considering 
possible concerns regarding a sponsor's ability to ensure Program 
integrity, food safety, and meal quality. For State agency approval to 
operate sites that provide multi-day meal service, sponsors opting to 
distribute multi-day meals must have procedures in place that document, 
to a reasonable extent, that the proper number of meals are distributed 
to each eligible child, these procedures must be included in the 
sponsor's application to participate in the Program (as discussed in 
section II.B.iv.) and may also impose additional requirements, at the 
State's discretion. As noted above, this rule further requires that 
multi-day meal issuance may only be used by Program sponsors in good 
standing, and that State agencies may only prohibit sponsors from using 
these options on a case-by-case basis without regard to sponsor type, 
if the State agency determines that a sponsor does not have the 
capability to effectively operate or oversee non-congregate meal 
services at their sites. USDA encourages State agencies, when 
considering the imposition of additional multi-day meal issuance 
requirements, to also consider the potential challenges for 
participants to access sites (which could include the effort required 
for families who reside in remote areas to travel to pick-up sites more 
than once per week).
    Accordingly, this rule codifies the option for multi-day meal 
issuance by adding a new Sec.  225.16(i)(1) to allow State agency 
approved sponsors to operate multi-day meal service. Sponsors opting to 
distribute multi-day meals must ensure through documented procedures, 
approved by their State agency, that the proper number of meals are 
distributed to each eligible child.
2. Parent or Guardian Meal Pick-Up
    Prior to the Act, provisions under the NSLA at 42 U.S.C. 1761(f)(3) 
and Program regulations at Sec.  225.9(d)(7) required that meals must 
be served to eligible children. These requirements ensured that Program 
sponsors provided meals directly to children who participate in the 
SFSP. As previously mentioned, the Act authorized USDA to issue 
guidance for summer 2023 rural non-congregate meal service. Through 
that guidance, USDA allowed the option for Program meals to be 
distributed to parents or guardians to take home to children and for 
non-congregate meals to be delivered to participants' homes. During the 
COVID-19 PHE, USDA used temporary legislative authority to grant a 
nationwide waiver, allowing sponsors to set up meal service in which 
parents or guardians could pick up meals for their children, without 
requiring the child to be present. This option proved to be a useful 
tool for ensuring children's access to Program meals in a non-
congregate setting. USDA established guidance that required Program 
sponsors opting to distribute

[[Page 90247]]

meals to parents or guardians to maintain accountability and Program 
integrity through processes that ensured meals were only distributed to 
parents or guardians of eligible children and that duplicate meals were 
not provided.
    During COVID-19 meal service operations, Program sponsors that used 
the parent and guardian pick-up waiver were required to ensure that 
duplicate meals were not provided to any child and that meals were 
distributed only to parents and guardians of children. To ensure this 
requirement was met, Program sponsors requested that parents and 
guardians provide their children's names or other identifying 
information when picking up meals.\2\ Similar to multi-day meal 
issuance, during the listening sessions, stakeholders provided mixed 
feedback on this aspect of operations. While some stakeholders raised 
integrity concerns with the possibility of serving meals to non-
participants and cited operational challenges during the pandemic, 
others expressed strong support for the option to allow a parent or 
guardian to pick up meals without children present. These respondents 
in support of the provision stated that the flexibility to provide or 
deliver a meal when children are not present is essential to both the 
purpose and efficacy of non-congregate service and found that this 
option was successfully implemented during the COVID-19 PHE. For 
example, multiple stakeholders reported the difficulty that many 
families in rural communities experience when required to commute long 
distances between work and home, noting that it is often more 
convenient for parents to pick up meals on their commute. On the other 
hand, some stakeholders reported concerns with oversight of unallowable 
or duplicate meal distribution to individuals on behalf of children. 
However, 13 non-State agency stakeholders suggested that sponsors know 
their rural communities (e.g., who has children and who does not) well 
enough to prevent individuals with the intent to defraud from receiving 
Program meals. USDA appreciates the attention paid by Program operators 
to this aspect of operations during the implementation of non-
congregate meal service and recognizes the importance of ensuring 
Program integrity while providing Program access to children who reside 
in rural areas.
    This rule codifies the option for sponsors in good standing to 
allow parents or guardians to pick up Program meals on behalf of 
eligible children. As noted above, State agencies have the discretion 
on a case-by-case basis to prohibit sponsors, regardless of sponsor 
type, from using this option if the State agency determines that the 
sponsor cannot adequately ensure these requirements are met. Program 
integrity is vital to the success of non-congregate meal service; 
therefore, for State agency approval to operate sites that provide meal 
pick-up, sponsors opting to distribute meals to parents or guardians 
must have procedures in place that document, to a reasonable extent, 
that meals are only distributed to parents or guardians of eligible 
children, and that duplicate meals are not distributed to any child. 
These procedures must be included in the sponsor's application to 
participate in the Program. Examples of documented procedures may 
include, but are not limited to, using sign-in sheets (including the 
use of technology-based solutions which may streamline program 
participation and monitoring), or with State agency approval, other 
methods which result in accurate recording completed by Program 
sponsors that want to implement parent or guardian meal pick-up for 
children. State agencies may establish specific criteria or standards 
for what should be included in these procedures.
    Although State agencies reported the prior use of these integrity 
measures among some sponsors during COVID-19 operations, USDA 
acknowledges that this type of meal duplication prevention effort may 
be new to some Program operators with the addition of the permanent 
non-congregate meal service option. USDA seeks to ensure that non-
congregate meals are accessible to all eligible children while 
maintaining Program accountability and integrity. Permanent non-
congregate meal service is a distinct approach to providing summer 
meals to children compared to the congregate meal service model, and 
thus, presents its own set of risks that Program sponsors must take 
reasonable steps to mitigate in order to maintain Program 
accountability and integrity.
    USDA seeks public comments on effective approaches for balancing 
integrity and access priorities, while offering parent or guardian meal 
pick-up flexibility during summer non-congregate service. Commenters 
are specifically encouraged to provide input on:
    <bullet> Successful and recommended procedures (ideally those 
informed by pandemic or summer 2023 implementation experience), for 
ensuring to a reasonable extent that meals are only distributed to 
parents or guardians of eligible children;
    <bullet> Criteria, standards, or other requirements that may be 
established by State agencies to ensure consistency in the approval of 
documented procedures to be implemented by sponsors;
    <bullet> Minimizing burden on States, sponsors, and families while 
maintaining the integrity standards of the Program;
    <bullet> The frequency and type of program integrity incidents 
witnessed during unannounced reviews, technical assistance visits, and 
scheduled reviews; and
    <bullet> The desirability or appropriateness of USDA to establish 
further integrity controls in relation to parent or guardian meal pick-
up through future guidance and/or rulemaking (including but not limited 
to restrictions based on sponsor experience, sponsor type, or site 
type).
    Accordingly, this rule adds Sec.  225.16(i)(2) to allow State 
agency approved sponsors to distribute meals to parents or guardians to 
provide to their children. Sponsors opting to distribute meals to 
parents or guardians must ensure through documented procedures, 
approved by their State agency, that meals are only distributed to 
parents or guardians of eligible children, and that duplicate meals are 
not distributed to any child.
3. Bulk Meal Items
    Summer 2023 implementation guidance permitted State agencies to 
approve self-preparation sites to distribute bulk foods to eligible 
children to provide multiple days' worth of meals for multi-day meal 
issuance, if the foods provided met the component and quantity 
requirements for each meal service type (i.e., breakfast, lunch/supper, 
snack). Additionally, the guidance required:
    <bullet> Foods to be in the proper amounts for each reimbursable 
meal being served;
    <bullet> Foods to be clearly identifiable as making up reimbursable 
meals;
    <bullet> Menus to be provided with directions indicating which 
items are to be used for each meal as well as the correct portion 
sizes; and
    <bullet> Minimal preparation is needed, including a prohibition on 
foods provided as ingredients for recipes that require chopping, 
mixing, or baking.
    Through additional guidance, USDA also encouraged sponsors to 
consider several factors such as food safety risks, access to kitchen 
appliances and cooking tools, and availability of the parent or 
guardian to assist with meal preparation. USDA received varied feedback 
from stakeholders regarding bulk meal item issuance during the 
listening sessions. Similar to multi-day meal issuance, many comments 
focused on the difficulty of balancing Program

[[Page 90248]]

integrity with Program access. Stakeholders also expressed concerns 
about food safety or food quality, providers' and households' storage 
capabilities, the usability of bulk food items, and the challenges 
families experience putting the items together to make the meal. Many 
State agencies reported limiting the use of bulk meal items, while some 
State agencies reported prohibiting bulk foods entirely due to 
operational challenges experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, such 
as the difficulty of food usage before spoilage when multiple days' 
worth of meals were provided at one time. Some State agencies noted 
that they allowed bulk meal item distribution only when provided with a 
food safety plan. Though several stakeholders expressed support for 
this flexibility, citing reasons including that it gives parents an 
opportunity to prepare and serve meals directly to their children, 
reduces packing waste, and potentially supports local economies and 
farmers.
    This rule codifies the option for self-preparation sponsors 
approved to operate non-congregate meal service to provide bulk foods 
that meet the meal pattern requirements for each meal service type with 
added safeguards to ensure Program integrity and the health and safety 
of children while promoting access for rural areas. As discussed in 
section II. E. ii. 1. of this rulemaking, about 30 percent of State 
agencies reported that more than half of Program sponsors provided 2 to 
3 days' worth of meals at one time. In addition, about one fourth of 
State agencies reported that more than half of these local Program 
sponsors provided a full week of meals at a time during COVID-19 
operations. Since multi-day meal issuance and bulk food distribution 
flexibilities work collectively additional restrictions around this 
pairing will be codified through this rulemaking. State agencies must 
determine whether a sponsor's proposed distribution of bulk food items 
meets State and local health, safety, and sanitation standards. In 
addition, when a sponsor is approved to use this option, the sponsor 
must ensure that:

    <bullet> Required food components for each reimbursable meal served 
meet the meal pattern requirements at Sec.  225.16(d);
    <bullet> All food items that contribute to a reimbursable meal are 
clearly identifiable;
    <bullet> Menus are provided and clearly indicate the food items and 
portion sizes for each reimbursable meal;
    <bullet> Food preparation, such as heating or warming, is minimal. 
With State agency and FNSRO approval, sponsors may offer food items 
that would require further preparation in circumstances where 
distribution of such food items is justified and appropriate; and
    <bullet> The maximum number of reimbursable meals provided to a 
child does not exceed the number of meals that could be provided over a 
5-calendar day period (or less if the State agency established a 
shorter calendar day period on a case-by-case basis). However, a State 
agency can approve sponsors to provide up to 10 days' worth of bulk 
meals, also on a case-by-case basis, in appropriate circumstances such 
as extremely remote areas where more frequent distribution is 
impracticable. The approved time period may not exceed the time period 
for which the sponsor is approved for multi-day meal issuance.

    As noted above, under this rule, USDA further codifies that bulk 
meal service may only be used by sponsors in good standing. State 
agencies have the discretion to limit bulk meal service for Program 
sponsors on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, State agencies can 
prohibit Program sponsors from using this flexibility, on a case-by-
case basis without regard to sponsor type, if the State agency 
determines that a sponsor does not have the capability to operate or 
oversee non-congregate meal services at their sites, such as if the 
State agency determines that the Program sponsor cannot adequately 
ensure the proper number of meals are distributed to each eligible 
child.
    USDA encourages State agencies to place reasonable limits on the 
food items provided or types of food items provided as part of bulk 
meal service, dependent on sponsor experience. For this reason, USDA is 
seeking comments on best practices for providing bulk food menu items 
to inform future rulemaking.
    Accordingly, this rule codifies the option to provide bulk meal 
items by adding a new Sec.  225.16(i)(3).
iii. Offer Versus Serve
    The NSLA in section 13(f)(7) [42 U.S.C. 1761(f)(7)] and Program 
regulations at Sec.  225.16(f)(1)(ii) provide that an SFA participating 
as a service institution may permit a child to refuse one or more items 
of a meal that the child does not intend to eat, under rules that the 
school uses for school meals under Program regulations in parts 210 and 
220 (7 CFR 210.10(e) and 220.8(e), respectively). Since section 
13(f)(7) of the NSLA only authorizes SFAs to use OVS, non-SFA 
sponsoring organizations are not permitted to use OVS.
    For summer 2023, USDA issued guidance that allowed SFA sponsors 
operating non-congregate meal service to utilize OVS with State agency 
approval, as long as all meal components or food items were offered, 
and all participants had the opportunity to select a complete 
reimbursable meal. While OVS is potentially a useful tool for reducing 
food waste, many stakeholders expressed concerns about program 
integrity and meal quality associated with OVS when meals were mostly 
pre-packaged. Several State agencies reported observing improper 
implementation of OVS during COVID, stating that some Program sponsors 
used OVS exclusively for the milk component instead of offering any 
meal components or items as required in SFSP regulations Sec.  
225.16(f)(1)(ii). However, the goals of OVS are to simplify Program 
administration and reduce food waste and costs while maintaining the 
nutritional integrity of the SFSP meal that is served. Therefore, USDA 
reminds State agencies and SFA sponsors that when implementing OVS, a 
child or parent must be able to decline to accept any component 
offered.
    Therefore, under this rulemaking, State agencies may only permit 
SFAs to operate OVS for non-congregate meal service as outlined in 
section 13(f)(7) of the NSLA and at Program regulations Sec.  
225.16(f)(1(ii). USDA continues to limit OVS to SFA sponsors, who are 
experienced with OVS in the NSLP, to remain consistent with the 
statutory requirements of the NSLA and to promote Program integrity. 
USDA encourages SFAs that intend to use OVS to carefully consider how 
to best implement this flexibility while ensuring that all meal service 
requirements are met as outlined in Sec.  225.16(f)(1)(2), and under 
parts 210 and 220 at Sec. Sec.  210.10(e) and 220.8(e), respectively. 
Some possible strategies for ensuring Program integrity include 
providing a buffet style meal pick-up service or utilizing an online 
ordering system where children can choose their SFSP meal items prior 
to meal pick-up or delivery.
    Accordingly, this rule does not make further changes to existing 
regulations Sec.  225.16(f)(1)(ii), effectively allowing SFAs to use 
OVS when providing non-congregate meal service.
iv. Clarifications To Existing Meal Service Requirements--Meal Service 
Times and Offsite Consumption of Food Items
Meal Service Times
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.16(c) require meals served in the 
SFSP to

[[Page 90249]]

follow specific time requirements. Meal service times must be 
established by sponsors for each site, included in the sponsor's 
application, and approved by the State agency. Meal service time 
requirements also specify that breakfast meals be served at or close to 
the beginning of a child's day; all sites except residential camps must 
start the next meal service at least one hour after the end of the 
previous meal or snack; and meals served outside of the approved meal 
service times are not eligible for reimbursement. In addition, meal 
service requirements at Sec.  225.16(c) provide instructions for meals 
not prepared on site. Specifically, meal deliveries must arrive before 
the approved meal service time and meals must be delivered within one 
hour of the start of the meal service if the site does not have 
adequate storage to hold hot or cold meals at the temperatures required 
by State or local health regulations.
    USDA determined that some meal service time requirements continued 
to apply under the summer 2023 guidance. The guidance instructed that 
meal service times must be:

    <bullet> Established for each site;
    <bullet> Included in the sponsor's application and approved by the 
State agency; and
    <bullet> Supported through State agency approved pick-up schedules 
or delivery plans with designated times for distribution.

    The guidance also required that the State agency must approve any 
changes in meal service times. Finally, sponsors offering a non-
congregate meal service were not required to serve breakfast in the 
morning or provide one hour between the end of one meal service and the 
start of the next.
    Stakeholders did not provide feedback on meal service time 
requirements during listening sessions. However, USDA maintains that 
some meal service time requirements are necessary to provide sufficient 
control at the State agency and sponsor levels to allow for planned 
meal services that meet the needs of the community, consistent with the 
summer 2023 guidance. Therefore, through this rulemaking, USDA is 
codifying the summer 2023 guidance on meal service time restrictions 
for non-congregate meal service.
    Accordingly, this rule adds a new Sec.  225.16(b)(5)(iii) to 
establish that non-congregate meal service is subject to the time 
restrictions for meal service at Sec.  225.16(c)(1), (4), and (5). This 
rule also amends Sec.  225.16(c)(2), (3) and (6) to clarify that non-
congregate meal service is exempt from requiring that breakfast must be 
served at or close to the beginning of the child's day, that one hour 
must elapse between meal services, and that meals not prepared on site 
must be delivered within one hour of the approved meal service time for 
congregate meal service. Lastly, the rule makes further changes to the 
requirements under meal service times in accordance with monitoring 
requirements, as discussed in section II.F.i.b. of this rulemaking.
Offsite Consumption of Food Items
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.16(h) allow sponsors to permit a 
child to take one fruit, vegetable, or grain item off-site for later 
consumption without prior State agency approval if all applicable State 
and local health, safety, and sanitation standards are met. Sponsors 
should only allow an item to be taken off-site if the site has adequate 
staffing to properly administer and monitor the site. A State agency 
may prohibit individual sponsors on a case-by-case basis from using 
this option if the State agency determines that the sponsor's ability 
to provide adequate oversight is in question. The State agency's 
decision to prohibit a sponsor from utilizing this option is not an 
appealable action. With the establishment of the non-congregate option 
in eligible rural areas and for meals served to eligible children in 
non-rural areas, this option only applies for congregate meal service.
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.16(h) to clarify that the 
provisional flexibility to allow children to take specific food items 
for off-site consumption only applies to congregate meal service.

F. Monitoring

    Under the Act, the authorization of rural non-congregate meal 
service in SFSP expanded meal service options for participating 
sponsors and sites. This action changes meal service operations at 
sites that will provide non-congregate meals and thus requires 
compliance with new regulatory requirements. By conducting reviews of 
sponsors and sites, State agencies maintain oversight of Program 
compliance; sponsors are also responsible for ensuring that their sites 
correctly adhere to Program requirements.
    Summer 2023 guidance provided that all existing monitoring 
requirements for State agencies and sponsors apply to non-congregate 
sponsors and sites. This included pre-approval visits, sponsor and site 
reviews, follow-up reviews, meal preparation facility review by State 
agencies as required in Program regulations at Sec.  225.7, and site 
visits and reviews conducted by sponsors as required in Program 
regulations at Sec.  225.15.
    USDA received significant feedback from stakeholders regarding 
monitoring and general Program integrity related to non-congregate meal 
service operations. Stakeholders reported isolated incidents of 
improper benefit distribution that occurred during the COVID-19 
pandemic at non-congregate meal service operations, which were in place 
under temporary waiver authority. States reported incidents of meal 
duplication and inaccurate use of meal service flexibilities that 
resulted in improper benefit distribution during the pandemic. 
Additionally, a few stakeholders noted the delicate balance between 
ensuring Program integrity and ensuring Program access.
    USDA understands that State agencies are best positioned to 
evaluate applicant sponsors and sites for non-congregate meal service 
operations. Under this rule, with two exceptions discussed below in 
section i. 2., the basic monitoring requirements for type, number, and 
frequency of reviews will not change. However, to ensure all Program 
operations, both congregate and non-congregate, are properly adhering 
to Program requirements, USDA is amending the regulations to 
incorporate operational changes concerning pre-approval visits and 
sponsor and site review that reflect the introduction of non-congregate 
meal service.
    USDA seeks to improve Program integrity by assessing how State 
agencies, sponsors and sites can use data analysis to detect potential 
Program mismanagement in the SFSP. USDA will create guidance materials 
and technical assistance tools to leverage Program data to detect 
potential Program mismanagement. USDA is seeking comments on best 
practices for utilizing data analysis and trends to ascertain Program 
irregularities which may be indicative of potential Program 
mismanagement to inform future rulemaking.
i. State Agency Responsibilities
1. Pre-Approval Visits
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.7(d) require State agencies to 
conduct pre-approval visits of sponsors and sites to assess the 
applicant sponsor's or site's potential for successful Program 
operations. That includes all applicant sponsors that did not 
participate in the Program in the prior year, those that had 
operational problems noted in the prior year, and any sites that the 
State agency has determined need a pre-approval visit. Current 
regulations allow pre-

[[Page 90250]]

approval visits of SFA sponsors that had a review with no significant 
deficiencies in the preceding 12 months to be conducted at the 
discretion of the State agency. Under this rule, that regulation will 
be amended to include CACFP institutions. The addition of this 
flexibility will ease administrative burden at the State agency while 
allowing the State to provide oversight on sponsors with operational 
problems and those needing additional technical assistance.
    Additionally, this rule will add a requirement that State agencies 
must establish a process to determine which sites need pre-approval 
visits. This process must consider characteristics of sites including 
sites that did not participate in the Program in the prior year, 
existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service, and 
existing sites that exhibited operational problems. This requirement 
will ensure that applicant sites have the capacity to operate the 
Program, including existing sites new to non-congregate meal service 
and existing sites that exhibited operational problems in the prior 
year. The importance of pre-approval visits was highlighted in the USDA 
Summer Food Service Program Integrity Study, which found that a 
majority of State directors believed the pre-approval visits were 
effective in spotting potential problems.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Giesen, L., Gola, A.A, Gearing, M., Gabay, M., Baier, K., 
Bozzolo, C., and Mwombela, B. (2023). Summer Food Service Program 
Integrity Study Final Report. Prepared by Westat, Contract No. 
12319818A0021; Order No. 12319818F0134. Alexandria, VA: U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of 
Policy Support, Project Officer: Chan Chanhatasilpa. Available 
online at: www.fns.usda.gov/research-and-analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.7(d) to allow pre-approval 
visits of sponsors which are a CACFP institution that had a review 
within the preceding 12 months and had no significant deficiencies to 
be conducted by the State agency at their discretion at paragraph 
(d)(2). Furthermore, this rule amends the State agency pre-approval 
site visit requirement at Sec.  225.7(d) to include that State agencies 
must develop a site selection process that considers site 
characteristics, including whether an existing site is new to non-
congregate meal service operations, by adding a new regulation at Sec.  
225.7(d)(4) and listing site characteristics at paragraph (d)(4)(i), 
(d)(4)(ii), and (d)(4)(iii). Lastly, the rule revises the paragraph 
structure at Sec.  225.7(d) to improve the clarity of the regulations.
2. Sponsor and Site Reviews
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.7(e) require State agencies to 
review SFSP sponsors and sites to ensure compliance with Program 
regulations by determining an appropriate sample selection of sponsors 
and sites to review. In determining which sponsors and sites to review, 
the State agency must, at a minimum, consider the sponsors' and sites' 
previous participation in the Program, their current and previous 
Program performance, and the results of previous reviews. Additionally, 
Program regulations at Sec.  210.18(e)(3)(ii) require State agencies 
during a school meals administrative review to review a minimum of one 
site if the SFA selected for review operates the SSO. Under this rule, 
USDA is requiring State agencies to include in the sample selection 
SFSP sponsors who operate either congregate or non-congregate sites, or 
both, per Sec.  225.7(e)(2). This is to ensure that all meal service 
options are included in the sample selection. USDA is also requiring 
State agencies to review a minimum of one congregate and one non-
congregate site during a school meals administrative review if the SFA 
operates both meal service models. If the SFA has one site that 
operates both congregate and non-congregate meal services, the State 
agency may review a minimum of one site and must observe both a 
congregate and non-congregate meal service at that one site.
    Furthermore, regulations at Sec.  225.7(e)(4) require State 
agencies to conduct a review of every new sponsor at least once during 
the first year of operations, annually review every sponsor that 
experienced operational problems in the prior year, review each sponsor 
at least once every 3 years, and conduct reviews of at least 10 percent 
of each reviewed sponsor's sites. This rule does not change any of 
these requirements, which require State agencies to provide adequate 
oversight of all SFSP sponsors, including those that are new or exhibit 
problems, and conduct site level reviews.
    In addition to the above requirements, per current Sec.  
225.7(e)(4)(ii), State agencies must also ensure that they annually 
review several sponsors whose Program reimbursements, in the aggregate, 
account for at least one half of the total Program meal reimbursements 
in the State in the prior year. This provision requires States to 
review larger sponsors to meet the total reimbursement threshold. These 
sponsors are solely selected based on size, which means, in many 
States, that larger sponsors must be reviewed every year to meet this 
requirement. These large sponsors, such as SFAs who operate CNPs on a 
year-round basis, are typically more familiar with Program 
requirements. Focusing critical oversight resources on these 
experienced sponsors limits the number of reviews that State agencies 
can conduct of sponsors who are small to mid-size and may be at risk 
for more serious operational challenges.
    To provide State agencies the ability to target their resources on 
sponsors of all sizes and operational capacity, this IFR removes the 
requirement at Sec.  225.7(e)(4)(ii). This will allow State agencies to 
adjust to any potential changes in the number of meals served due to 
new and existing sponsors operating the non-congregate meal service 
option. It will also facilitate the timely identification of issues 
that pose a risk to Program integrity. The elimination of this 
requirement provides State agencies the ability to review sponsors of 
various operational capacities who are not currently being reviewed 
with the same frequency as larger sponsors. This will allow State 
agencies to target resources on sponsors of all sizes who may pose a 
greater risk to Program integrity or need additional monitoring and 
technical assistance, by identifying a wider variety of issues based on 
criteria such as spikes and anomalies in meal claiming. This will 
ensure Program integrity across all SFSP Program operators.
    In addition to providing State agencies the ability to focus 
resources on sponsor reviews that are not just related to the amount of 
Program reimbursements, USDA is also adding under Sec.  225.7(e)(4) a 
provision that allows State agencies to more frequently review sponsors 
who require additional technical assistance. The addition of this 
provision at Sec.  225.7(e)(4)(iv) further ensures integrity in the 
Program by allowing State agencies to review sponsors of all sizes more 
frequently than the current 3-year review cycle, if the State agency 
determines the sponsor needs additional oversight and technical 
assistance.
    Additionally, USDA is including meal service models, both 
congregate and non-congregate, and meal distribution methods in the 
review sample under Sec.  225.7(e)(4). The addition of this provision 
at Sec.  225.7(e)(4)(v) ensures all types of meal service models and 
meal distribution methods are included in the 10 percent of sponsor's 
sites required to be reviewed. In terms of the number of sites each 
sponsor can be approved to operate, the State agency, per Sec.  
225.6(b)(6), must not approve any sponsor to operate more than 200 
sites

[[Page 90251]]

or to serve more than an average of 50,000 children per day. However, 
if the sponsor can demonstrate that it has the capacity to manage and 
operate the Program larger than these limits, the State agency may 
approve exceptions. Regardless of the size of the sponsor's operation, 
the State agency must have the capacity to conduct reviews of at least 
10 percent of the sponsor's sites per Sec.  225.6(b)(6).
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.7(e)(4) to remove Sec.  
225.7(e)(4)(ii), the one-half aggregate review requirement. The rule 
will also add a new Sec.  225.7(e)(4)(iv) to include review of 
additional sponsors at the State agencies discretion and amend Sec.  
225.7(e)(4)(v) for the inclusion of all meal types in the 10 percent 
review sample. Additionally, this rule amends Sec.  225.6(b)(6) to 
include the requirement that the State agency must have the capacity to 
conduct reviews of at least 10 percent of the sponsor's sites when the 
State agency approves a sponsor to operate more than 200 sites or to 
serve more than an average of 50,000 children per day. The rule also 
revises the paragraph structure at Sec.  225.6(b)(6) to improve the 
readability of the regulations. Lastly, this rule amends Sec.  
210.18(e)(3)(ii) to include the review of a non-congregate site for 
SFAs operating non-congregate meal service in the SSO.
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.7(e)(5) direct State agencies to 
develop criteria for site selection when selecting sites to meet the 
minimum number of sites required under paragraph (e)(4)(v). This rule 
will include at Sec.  225.7(e)(5)(i)(G) and (H) the type of meal 
service (e.g., congregate or non-congregate); if non-congregate, the 
type of meal distribution method, in the characteristics used to 
determine sites selected as part of the sponsor's review. This 
provision will ensure the new meal service model type and meal 
distribution method is considered when selecting sites for review.
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.7(e)(5) to include new non-
congregate meal services at paragraph (e)(5)(i)(G) and (H).
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.7(j) require State agencies to 
develop and provide monitor review forms to all approved sponsors. The 
monitor review form must include, at a minimum, the time of the 
reviewer's arrival and departure, the site supervisor's printed name 
and signature, a certification statement to be signed by the monitor, 
the number of meals prepared or delivered, the number of meals served 
to children, the deficiencies noted, the corrective actions taken by 
the sponsor, and the date of such actions. This rule will include 
whether the meal service is congregate or non-congregate on the monitor 
review form, which must be completed by sponsor monitors per Sec.  
225.7(j). This ensures that there is a differentiation between the 
congregate and non-congregate meal service at each site for each 
review.
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.7(j) to include whether the 
meal service is congregate or non-congregate on the monitoring review 
form.
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.16(c)(1)(iii) require meal service 
times to be approved by the State agency. Under this rule, all meal 
service times approved by the State agency must be in accordance with 
the State agency or sponsor's capacity to monitor the full meal service 
during a review. This provision will ensure that the sponsor and State 
agency have enough resources and the capacity to review the full meal 
service.
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.16(c)(1)(iii) to clarify 
that the approval of meal service times must be in accordance with the 
State agency or sponsor's capacity to monitor the full meal service 
during a review.
i. Sponsor Responsibilities
1. Training
    Program regulations at Sec.  225.15(d)(1) require sponsors to hold 
Program training sessions for its administrative and site personnel. 
These trainings must, at a minimum, include: the purpose of the 
Program, site eligibility, recordkeeping, site operations, meal pattern 
requirements, and the duties of a monitor. This rule will include both 
congregate and non-congregate meal service in the required training 
conducted by the sponsor. This is to ensure that the proper meal 
service is operated and monitored by the sponsor's administrative and 
site personnel at each site.
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.15(d)(1) to include the 
addition of congregate and non-congregate meal service in the sponsor 
Program training sessions for its administrative and site personnel 
prior to the operation of a site's first meal service.
2. Site Reviews
    Through guidance, sponsors were required to conduct pre-operational 
visits for new sites and those that experienced operational problems in 
the previous year before a site operates the SFSP. This rule codifies 
the requirement for sponsors to conduct pre-operational visits for new 
sites and those that experienced operational problems in the previous 
year before a site operates the Program per Sec.  225.15(d). Similar to 
pre-approval visits conducted by the State agency, pre-operational 
visits conducted by the sponsor assist the sponsor in detecting 
potential operational issues prior to operation of the Program. USDA 
also supports the use of virtual monitoring as a tool to supplement the 
required on-site monitoring reviews. Providing technical assistance and 
training through virtual technologies may also allow them to be offered 
more frequently and increase access to trainings, thereby supporting 
Program integrity. In addition, this rule will codify that existing 
sites that are new to non-congregate meal service are considered new 
sites; and as such are also required to have a pre-operational visit. 
This is to ensure that a site has the facilities to provide meal 
service for the anticipated number of children that will receive non-
congregate meals and the capability to conduct the proposed meal 
service.
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.15(d) to include pre-
operational site visits for new sites and those that experienced 
operational problems in the previous year, including existing sites 
switching to non-congregate meal service, to be conducted by the 
sponsor prior to a site operating the Program at paragraph (d)(2).
    In this rule, current regulations at Sec.  225.15(d)(2), which 
require sponsors to visit each of their sites at least once during the 
first two weeks of Program operations for all new sites and sites 
determined by the sponsor to need a visit based on criteria established 
by the State agency, is now moved to paragraph (d)(3); additionally, 
paragraph (d)(3) will include the requirement for sponsors to conduct 
site visits for all existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal 
service within the first two weeks of operation. This ensures that the 
food service operation is operating smoothly and to verify information 
such as the site address, storage, holding and preparation facilities, 
meal distribution method, and service capacity of non-congregate meal 
services.
    Accordingly, this rule amends Sec.  225.15(d) to include all 
existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service as sites 
needing a site visit conducted by the sponsor within the first two 
weeks of Program operations at paragraph (d)(3).
    Current regulations at Sec.  225.15(d)(3) require sponsors must 
conduct a full review of food service operations at each site at least 
once during the first four weeks of Program operations. This rule will 
move this provision from

[[Page 90252]]

paragraph (d)(3) to paragraph (d)(4). There are no changes to this 
provision; however, a full review of food service operations at each 
site includes non-congregate rural meal services.
    Accordingly, this rule amends the requirement at Sec.  225.15(d) 
that sponsors must conduct a full review of food service operations at 
each site at least once during the first four weeks of Program 
operations and will be located at paragraph (d)(4).

G. Miscellaneous

i. Collection of Summer Meal Site Location Data
    Section 26(d) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. 1769g(d)) mandates that the 
USDA enter into a contract with a non-governmental organization to 
establish and maintain an information clearinghouse (named ``USDA 
National Hunger Clearinghouse'' or ``Clearinghouse'') of groups that 
assist low-income individuals or communities regarding nutrition 
assistance programs or other assistance. The Clearinghouse includes a 
database of non-governmental, grassroots organizations in the areas of 
hunger and nutrition, along with a mailing list to communicate with 
these organizations. The Clearinghouse also operates the USDA National 
Hunger Hotline, through which assistance is provided via phone or text 
message. Local level antihunger organizations enter their information 
into the database, and Clearinghouse staff use that information to 
provide the public with information about where they can get food 
assistance. SFSP and SSO meal sites are a component of this assistance.
    USDA works closely with State agencies to ensure that children who 
receive free or reduced price school meals continue to receive the 
nutrition they need when schools are closed--whether during summer 
break or unexpected closures during the school year. Through USDA's 
summer meal programs, approved sites in communities across the country 
can serve meals to children up to age 18 at no cost. During the summer 
operational period (May through September), USDA collects summer meal 
site information from State agencies via the Summer Food Site Locator 
form (FNS-905). Unlike other resources in the Clearinghouse, this form 
is specific to the summer meals programs and may only be completed by 
State agencies. The data collected populates the Clearinghouse database 
with summer meals site information and locations. Data are also 
integrated into public-facing web tools. One such tool is the Summer 
Meals Site Finder (Site Finder). This mapping tool was developed by 
USDA to help children, parents, and others quickly and easily find 
summer meal sites near them. The Site Finder, available for use at no 
charge, is a web-based application that also works on tablets, 
smartphones, and other mobile devices without the need to download 
software or other data. The mapping tool allows users to enter an 
address, city, State, or zip code to find up to 50 nearby site 
locations, along with their addresses, hours of operation, and contact 
information, and directions. State agencies provide data to FNS to be 
mapped on the tool and update the data throughout the summer to include 
operational changes and new site locations.
    The form FNS-905, which may only be completed by State agencies, 
collects details about each site such as times, days, and dates of 
operation, location, types of meals served, contact information, and if 
the site is open to the public. Sponsors provide this information to 
their State agencies during the sponsor and site application process as 
required by Program regulations at Sec.  225.6. Currently, completing 
the FNS-905 is voluntary, though USDA requests those State agencies 
that choose to participate to complete the form at least once per the 
summer operational period, and submit weekly updates, as needed, during 
summer operations. As of summer 2022, most State agencies submitted 
FNS-905 forms at least once per summer.
    Other interested parties have used the data collected on the FNS-
905 in the creation of mobile applications and texting services. The 
data has also been used by State agencies to plan summer site visits, 
by Program sponsors to strategically plan for future years' summer 
feeding operations, and by researchers in academic institutions. In 
addition to members of the general public, other interested parties may 
include nutrition or health education professionals, State or local 
government health officials, nutrition councils, public interest 
advocates, private foundations, and corporate officials.
    USDA has also used these data collected from the FNS-905 to improve 
integrity and to analyze policy proposals, as well as to report to 
executive agency officials and Congress real-time results that cannot 
be ascertained through other reporting methods. The Clearinghouse also 
supports the USDA National Hunger Hotline and texting service, which 
refers people in need anywhere in the U.S. to food pantries, soup 
kitchens, grassroots organizations and, in this case specifically, 
approved open summer meal sites. The data collected using the FNS-905 
is updated by USDA once per week during the summer meal programs' 
operating period and posted on an open data platform that is always 
accessible to the public.
    The introduction of the rural non-congregate meal service option 
provides USDA and Program operators with a new opportunity to expand 
access to the summer meal programs. The value and far-ranging use of 
summer meal site data demonstrates the need for timely, accurate, and 
complete data to be available for the public. In addition, this is the 
only public resource that provides detailed meal site information 
across all States and territories, which emphasizes the need to collect 
this data and share it with families searching for summer meal sites in 
their area. In line with these changes, USDA will require State 
agencies to submit summer meal site data to FNS via the FNS-905.
    As stated previously, nearly all States and territories already 
provide this data to USDA on a voluntary basis during the summer 
season, though USDA recognizes the potential administrative burden and 
systems changes associated with introducing a new, mandatory reporting 
requirement for State agencies. Further, USDA understands the need to 
provide sufficient time to update current systems to accommodate this 
change. Therefore, USDA will delay implementation of the reporting 
requirement until one year after the publication of this IFR. USDA is 
also seeking to modernize data submission and processing, and the Site 
Finder tool. As such, USDA seeks comments from State agencies on the 
implementation of mandatory reporting requirements, including form and 
procedural changes:
    <bullet> When is the earliest that your State submits the initial 
site information to USDA? Are there factors that impact when you are 
ready to submit this information to USDA, such as application deadline 
and processing?
    <bullet> How frequently does your State submit to USDA updates on 
summer meal sites during the Site Finder operational period?
    <bullet> How often do operations (e.g., hours/locations, type of 
site) of existing sites change, or how often during the summer are new 
sites added?
    <bullet> What would be the optimal reporting schedule for summer 
meal site data submissions?
    <bullet> How does your State agency assess the accuracy of summer 
meal site data at the State level, and ensure accuracy of site 
information at the sponsor and site level?
    <bullet> What are best practices to solicit from sponsors timely 
and accurate

[[Page 90253]]

updates to site information such as meal service type, times, days, and 
meal types, and to ensure operational changes are reflected in the 
State's system and the site data that is reported to FNS?
    USDA also welcomes comments from stakeholders and the general 
public on how summer meal site data and USDA's Site Finder mapping tool 
can be made more usable and useful.
    Accordingly, this rule adds a new Sec.  225.8(e) to require States 
agencies submit to FNS a list of open site locations and their 
operational details via the Summer Food Site Locator form (FNS-905) by 
June 30 of each year, or a later date approved by the FNSRO, and 
provide a minimum of two updates during the summer operational period. 
However, State agencies are encouraged to submit weekly updates if 
there are any changes to the State agency's data, to ensure families 
have the most up-to-date site information. These amendments are 
effective December 30, 2024.
ii. Reimbursements
    The NSLA was amended to establish the non-congregate meal service 
option for rural areas with no congregate meal service for sites that 
are located in areas in which poor economic conditions exist. It also 
establishes an option for meals served to children certified as being 
eligible for free or reduced price meals under the NSLP and the SBP who 
reside in rural areas that are not documented as areas in which poor 
economic conditions exist, which is codified as a ``conditional non-
congregate site'' under this rule at Sec.  225.2. For this reason, all 
meals served at an approved rural site implementing non-congregate 
service are eligible for SFSP or SSO reimbursement. SFSP sponsors are 
eligible to receive the rural or self-preparation site reimbursement 
rate for each meal served to participating children at rural sites (7 
CFR 225.9(d)(7)). However, as previously discussed in this rulemaking, 
sponsors of conditional non-congregate sites may only claim meals 
served to children who meet the Program's income standards. Section 
II.D.iii. (Responsibilities of Sponsors) of this IFR also discusses a 
change to Sec.  225.14(d)(7) clarifying that if the sponsor operates a 
conditional non-congregate site, it must certify that it will collect 
information to determine children's Program eligibility to support its 
claim for reimbursement. Furthermore, section II.D.ii. 
(Responsibilities of Sponsors) of this IFR discusses the change at 
Sec.  225.15(b)(4) to limit reimbursement of second meals to congregate 
meal service. Therefore, this rule also makes changes in Sec.  225.9 
regarding Program assistance to sponsors reflecting these 
clarifications.
    Accordingly, this rule adds a new Sec.  225.9(d)(11) to require 
that sponsors of conditional non-congregate sites are reimbursed only 
for meals served to children whose eligibility for Program meals is 
documented. In addition, this rule amends Sec.  225.9(f) to clarify the 
State agency must ensure that reimbursements for second meals are 
limited to the percentage tolerance established when reviewing a 
sponsor's claim for congregate meals served.
iii. SSO Non-Congregate Provisions
    The Act amends the NSLA and instructs USDA to promulgate 
regulations to carry out the new provisions under section 13 of the 
NSLA, establishing an option to provide non-congregate summer meal 
service in rural areas with no congregate meal service. Consistent with 
long-standing summer meal service program administration, USDA 
interpreted this statutory authority as extending to the SSO, which is 
similarly authorized under section 13 of the NSLA. Therefore, through 
this IFR, USDA is codifying the availability of rural non-congregate 
meal service through the SSO. Under this rulemaking, an SSO site in a 
rural area may be approved to offer a non-congregate meal service 
consistent with the requirements under part 225. SFAs approved to offer 
a non-congregate meal service must comply with the non-congregate meal 
service provisions set forth at Sec.  225.16(b)(5)(i) and (iv) by this 
IFR (section II.E.i.) and may use the non-congregate meal service 
options described in Sec.  225.16(i) under this IFR (section II.E.ii.). 
In addition, this rule defines the SSO under parts 210 and 220 to mean 
that the meal service alternative authorized by section 13(a)(8) of the 
Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(8), 
under which public or nonprofit school food authorities participating 
in the National School Lunch Program or School Breakfast Program offer 
meals at no cost to children during the traditional summer vacation 
periods and, for year-round schools, vacation periods longer than 10 
school days.
    As part of this IFR, USDA invites public comments on these new 
provisions affecting SSO, specifically whether additional requirements 
should be codified to facilitate and provide clarity on the provision 
of rural non-congregate service through the SSO.
    Accordingly, this IFR adds a new definition of the SSO in 
Sec. Sec.  210.2 and 220.2 and adds new Sec. Sec.  210.34 and 220.23 
which will set forth the rural non-congregate provisions for the SSO.
iv. Annual Update To Approved Rural Data Sources
    As discussed in section II. A. ii., under this IFR, USDA is 
expanding the definition of ``rural'' in Sec.  225.2 to allow the use 
of multiple recognized Federal classification schemes to designate 
areas as rural. The amended definition of ``rural'' will also provide 
discretion to USDA for any potential updates or changes to 
classification schemes at a future date. Although these recognized 
Federal classification schemes are updated with each decennial census 
and periodically based on annual census surveys, though this 
rulemaking, USDA is making a commitment to issue updates by January 1 
of each year, or as soon as is practicable, in order to have an 
established effective date for new data or updates to be used by State 
agencies and program operators for rural designations in that Program 
year. USDA will also make this data available and update the FNS Rural 
Designation Map to provide this information in a simplified format. 
Accordingly, this IFR adds a new Sec.  225.18(l) to establish an annual 
effective date by which USDA will issue updates to the approved rural 
data sources to be used for designations in that program year. USDA 
will make this information available and referenceable in a simplified 
format.

H. Technical Amendments

    USDA is removing obsolete provisions from the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) in 7 CFR part 225. Section 225.14(d)(4) references 
requirements specific to sponsors that administer homeless feeding 
sites. The Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act of 1998 eliminated 
homeless sites in SFSP. Accordingly, these requirements are removed 
from the regulations.
    This rule also includes amendments to correct several technical 
errors found in 7 CFR part 225. USDA will make technical changes to the 
designation of paragraphs to comply with current paragraph structure 
requirements for the CFR, where errors appear in the subsections of 
part 225 that are amended by this rule. This rule also makes several 
additional technical changes to fix a small number of obsolete terms of 
usage and punctuation. Finally, the Department will also make non-
substantive technical changes to existing language to provide 
consistency and improve readability of regulations in subsections of 
part 225 that are amended by this rule. None of the technical changes 
will effect a substantive change in the Program.

[[Page 90254]]

Accordingly, this rule amends Program regulations to:
    <bullet> Replace the term ``handicapped'' with the term 
``disabled'' in the definition of ``children'' at Sec.  225.2;
    <bullet> Correct the numbering of the subordinate paragraphs in the 
definitions of ``Children,'' ``Operating Costs,'' and ``Rural,'' and in 
paragraphs (d) and (j) in Sec.  225.7, and paragraph (d) in Sec.  
225.11;
    <bullet> Correct the punctuation in Sec. Sec.  225.6(i) and 
225.7(j);
    <bullet> Replace reference to the Food Stamp benefit, renamed the 
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefit, that appears 
under Sec.  225.15(f)(3);
    <bullet> Improve the readability of regulations at Sec. Sec.  
225.6(a)(2), (b)(6), 225.9(d)(9), and 225.15(b)(3);
    <bullet> Replace the word ``believes'' with the word ``determines'' 
in Sec. Sec.  225.6(g)(1)(vii)(C), (g)(1)(ix)(C), (g)(2)(iv)(C), 
(g)(2)(v)(C), and 225.16(e)(4);
    <bullet> Replace the term ``shall'' with the term ``must'' where it 
appears in the subsections of part 225 that are amended by this rule; 
and
    <bullet> Revise the language that appears under Sec. Sec.  
225.6(f)(1)(iii)(F), 225.7(n)(1), and 225.15(e) to reflect the current 
federally protected bases for the CNPs.

I. Severability

    The statutory enhancement of the USDA SFSP and SSO to include the 
option for rural operators to use alternate service models, including 
the non-congregate rural option, that are tailored to the needs of the 
communities they serve is essential for ensuring that all children 
receive nutritious meals during the summer months when school is not in 
session. As directed by statute, USDA implemented the SFSP and SSO 
rural non-congregate option in Summer 2023, with careful attention to 
meeting the needs of rural communities, while protecting program 
integrity. Based on the statutory requirement to expand the SFSP and 
SSO for Summer 2024, USDA has determined that its authority to 
implement the regulation through this interim final rule is well-
supported in law and practice and should be upheld in any legal 
challenge. Further, USDA has determined that its exercise of its 
authority reflects sound policy. However, in the event that any portion 
of the rule is declared invalid, USDA intends that the various aspects 
of the use of alternate service models be severable. For example, if a 
court were to find any provision unlawful, such as (1) the definition 
of ``rural'' for program purposes, (2) the State agency's authority to 
approve a sponsor's request for a rural designation, (3) the provision 
of both congregate and non-congregate meals at a single site, or (4) 
some other aspect of this rule, USDA intends that all other provisions 
in the rule will remain in effect to ensure effective implementation of 
the rural non-congregate option. USDA has concluded that it is in the 
interests of both rural communities and the children who reside in them 
for nutritious meals to be provided using alternate service models 
during the summer months when school is not in session. Furthermore, in 
the event any part or the entirety of the non-congregate rural option 
established by this rulemaking were declared invalid, such option is 
severable and does not prevent the Summer EBT program, discussed below, 
from proceeding since the non-congregate rural option and Summer EBT 
program function independently.

III. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule--Summer EBT

Subpart A--General

i. General Purpose and Scope
    This rulemaking establishes the regulations through which the 
Secretary of Agriculture will administer the Summer EBT Program. 
Section 13A of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (NSLA), 
42 U.S.C. 1762, authorizes the Secretary to establish a program under 
which States, as well as Indian Tribal Organizations that administer 
the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and 
Children (WIC), electing to participate in the Summer EBT Program must, 
beginning in Summer 2024 and annually thereafter, issue to each 
eligible household Summer EBT benefits. As provided for in section 
13A(a), the Summer EBT Program was established ``for the purpose of 
providing nutrition assistance. . .during the summer months for each 
eligible child, to ensure continued access to food when school is not 
in session for the summer.''
    Accordingly, this program's purpose and scope are codified in a new 
7 CFR 292.1.
i. Definitions
    Implementation of the Summer EBT Program will necessitate new 
systems and processes, and with them, new definitions. Some of the 
definitions in this rulemaking are identical to, or adapted from, 
definitions in Child Nutrition Program, SNAP, or WIC regulations. Other 
definitions have been created in this rulemaking to clarify specific 
functions and terms essential to the Summer EBT Program and are 
entirely new.
1. Existing Definitions
    The following existing definitions from elsewhere in USDA 
regulations are codified in this rule without change:
    Act; Acquisition; Advance Planning Document for project planning or 
Planning APD (APD or PAPD) Advance Planning Document Update (APDU); 
Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS); Continuous school calendar; Current 
income; Department; Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) account; 
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card; Electronic Benefit Transfer 
(EBT) contractor or vendor; Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) system; 
Enhancement; FNS; FNSRO; Firm; Information System (IS); LEA;OIG; 
Project; Request for Proposal (RFP); SNAP; Secretary; State; 
Territories; and WIC.
2. Modified Definitions
    The following definitions from elsewhere in USDA regulations were 
adapted to reflect the unique needs of the Summer EBT Program.
    2 CFR part 200. Minor modification from 7 CFR part 210, which 
includes the following: (NOTE: Pre-Federal Award Requirements and 
Contents of Federal Awards (subpart C) does not apply to the NSLP).
    Administrative costs. This definition was modified from 7 CFR 225.2 
to refer to the Summer EBT program instead of the Summer Food Service 
Program.
    Adult. Modified from 7 CFR 245.2 to clarify that the need for the 
definition itself is for application purposes, and to change from 21 to 
18.
    Categorically eligible. Modified from 7 CFR 245.2 to refer to 
Summer EBT rather than free meals or milk.
    Disclosure. Modified from 7 CFR 245.2 to refer to Summer EBT 
eligibility rather than free and reduced price meal eligibility.
    Enrolled students. Modified from 7 CFR 245.9 to refer to students 
who are enrolled in and attending NSLP/SBP schools who have access to a 
meal service (breakfast or lunch) on a regular basis.
    Household. At 7 CFR 245.2 ``Household'' means ``family.'' And at 7 
CFR 245.2 ``Family'' means a group of related or nonrelated 
individuals, who are not residents of an institution or boarding house, 
but who are living as one economic unit.'' Summer EBT does not use the 
term family, so household is defined and used throughout.
    Implementation Advance Planning Document or Implementation APD 
(IAPD). Modified from 7 CFR 277.18 to

[[Page 90255]]

conform with Summer EBT requirements and processes.
    Income eligibility guidelines. Modified to specify the programs for 
which the Income Eligibility Guidelines apply.
    Indian Tribal Organization (ITO). Adapted from other definitions of 
ITO used by USDA programs and modified to reflect that only ITOs that 
administer WIC are eligible to administer Summer EBT.
    SNAP Eligible foods. This definition is the same as the definition 
of ``Eligible foods'' at 7 CFR 271.2. It is modified here to specify 
that these are SNAP eligible foods.
    SNAP Retail food store. This definition is the same as the 
definition of ``Retail food store'' at 7 CFR 271.2. It is modified here 
to specify that these are SNAP retail food stores.
    Vendor. Modified from 7 CFR 271.2 to reference Summer EBT instead 
of SNAP.
    Verification. Modified from 7 CFR 245.2 to reference Summer EBT 
instead of NSLP/SBP and to state that direct verification is required 
rather than optional.
    Verification for cause. Modified from 7 CFR 245.6a(c)(7) to 
reference Summer EBT agencies.
3. New Definitions
    The following new definitions were developed specifically for the 
Summer EBT Program.
    Cash-Value Benefit (CVB) this term relates to the type of benefit 
that is a fixed-dollar amount used to obtain supplemental foods by 
participants served by an ITO for purposes of the Summer EBT program. 
It is an option for ITO benefit delivery.
    Dual participation. This term was developed to describe a 
prohibited situation in which a child is receiving multiple Summer EBT 
benefits simultaneously.
    Eligible child. This definition was developed to describe the 
unique population of children who are eligible for the newly created 
Summer EBT Program.
    Eligible household. This definition was created in the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328) for the purposes of Summer 
EBT.
    Expungement. This term describes removal of Summer-EBT benefits and 
was not previously defined in regulations at 7 CFR 274.2 or other USDA 
regulations.
    Direct verification. Direct verification is conducted in the NSLP/
SBP; however, this term was not previously defined in regulations at 7 
CFR 245.6a.
    Food instrument. This term is applicable to ITOs administering the 
Summer EBT program, with the same meaning as the definition set forth 
in regulations at 7 CFR 246.2.
    Instructional year. This definition is included to reflect language 
introduced in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-
328).
    ITO Service Area. This definition was developed to describe the 
geographic area served by an ITO Summer EBT agency.
    NSLP/SBP. This term was not previously defined in 7 CFR 245.2 or 
other USDA regulations.
    NSLP/SBP application. Distinct from the definition at 7 CFR 245.2 
for ``Household application,'' this term specifically refers to NSLP/
SBP household income applications.
    Period of eligibility. This definition was created to describe the 
time period in which a child may be deemed eligible for Summer EBT 
benefits.
    Program. This definition was created to reference the new Summer 
EBT program that is codified in 7 CFR part 292.
    Rolling verification. This definition was created to describe the 
process by which verification may be conducted for Summer EBT 
applications on a rolling basis.
    School aged. This definition was created to describe a subset of 
the population which is the appropriate age to be in school in a State 
or ITO.
    Special Provision school. This definition was created to 
efficiently describe a school that elects Provision 1, Provision 2, 
Provision 3, or the Community Eligibility Provision to operate the 
National School Lunch and/or School Breakfast Programs and that does 
not conduct annual, individual eligibility determinations for all 
students.
    Streamlined certification. This definition describes a process 
specific to the Summer EBT program where eligible children may be 
issued benefits without needing to submit a Summer EBT application, and 
benefits may be issued without confirmation of school enrollment data.
    Summer EBT application. This definition describes an application 
that can be used to establish eligibility for Summer EBT benefits.
    Summer EBT agency. This definition describes the entities which 
enter into a written agreement with FNS to administer Summer EBT 
including State agencies and ITOs.
    Summer operational period. This definition was created to describe 
the period for which Summer EBT benefits will be issued.
    Supplemental foods. This definition was created in section 
13A(h)(4) of the NSLA. The definition is applicable to ITOs 
administering the Summer EBT program.
    Accordingly, these definitions are codified in a new 7 CFR 292.2.
i. Administration
1. Delegation of Responsibilities
    Since 2010, USDA, States, and ITOs have worked together to 
implement and evaluate the provision of EBT benefits in the summer to 
ensure kids can get the nutrition they need when school is not in 
session, including through SEBTC demonstration projects and, more 
recently, P-EBT. Thanks to the dedication and perseverance of our State 
and ITO partners, USDA has been able to overcome many obstacles and 
challenges to standing up these programs and have also learned valuable 
lessons about successful Program implementation. In establishing P-EBT, 
Child Nutrition and SNAP State agencies collaborated and committed to 
helping children and their families in times of need. This same level 
of commitment and collaboration will be critical to the success of the 
Summer EBT Program as well. It is important for State agencies 
administering SNAP and/or Child Nutrition Programs to work together in 
a collaborative way to determine the appropriate roles and 
responsibilities of each to ensure successful program implementation 
and a positive customer experience. While USDA expects that most ITOs 
administering WIC will administer Summer EBT through just the WIC 
agency, ITOs might also find that an agency partnership is appropriate. 
USDA also urges States and ITOs to work with their legislatures and/or 
Tribal leadership to determine any changes in State or Tribal law 
needed to support effective Program implementation, and to identify 
State or Tribal funds to cover the State or ITO portion of Summer EBT 
administrative costs.
    USDA has delegated administration of the Summer EBT Program to FNS 
and FNS will act on behalf of the Department to administer the Program. 
See 7 CFR part 2, subpart I (Delegations of Authority by the Under 
Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services). In turn, FNS 
will delegate administration of Summer EBT to States and ITOs approved 
to operate the Program pursuant to a written agreement. The Governor or 
other appropriate executive or legislative authority of each State or 
ITO will designate one or more Summer EBT agencies to be responsible 
for the administration of the Summer EBT

[[Page 90256]]

program within the State or ITO. Each administering agency will enter 
into a written Federal-State agreement with USDA for the administration 
of the Program and will be known as a ``Summer EBT agency.'' If more 
than one Summer EBT agency is named within a State or ITO, a 
coordinating Summer EBT agency must also be named and all other 
agencies with an agreement with USDA will be partnering Summer EBT 
agencies. Although USDA expects that agencies within a State or ITO 
will partner effectively in the administration of the Program, USDA has 
determined that it will be beneficial for each State or ITO with more 
than one Summer EBT agency to designate a coordinating agency. If only 
one agency within the State or ITO will be responsible for 
administering the Program, designation of partnering agencies is not 
applicable. USDA will work with States to ensure it is appropriate to 
designate only one agency while still meeting all Summer EBT 
regulations and requirements. Each State or ITO will decide how Summer 
EBT responsibilities will be delegated across their administering 
agencies. To ensure clear roles and responsibilities, the Summer EBT 
agencies within a State or ITO must enter into an inter-agency written 
agreement that defines the roles and responsibilities of each, as well 
as the administrative structure and lines of authority. USDA suggests 
that States and ITOs evaluate their resources and capabilities, and 
consider administrative and cost efficiency, the customer experience, 
program integrity, and their previous Summer EBT and/or P-EBT 
experiences when determining how to structure their program's 
administration. For the purpose of this interim final rule and Summer 
EBT regulations codified at 7 CFR part 292, the term `Summer EBT 
agency' refers to all agencies within the State or ITO that have an 
agreement with USDA to administer the program unless the coordinating 
or partnering agency is specified. For example, Sec.  292.13(a) 
requires the Summer EBT agency to make a Summer EBT application 
available to households with children enrolled in NSLP or SBP-
participating schools. The regulations require that this activity is 
completed, and the coordinating and partnering Summer EBT agencies will 
determine how the responsibility is delegated within the State or ITO.
    Coordinating Summer EBT agencies will be the primary point of 
contact for the State or ITO's Summer EBT program. There may be 
situations in which USDA communicates directly with designated contacts 
at the partnering agency on issues more relevant to that agency. 
Nevertheless, the coordinating agency will be USDA's first point of 
contact for most issues and should be included on all communications 
between USDA and the partnering agency. It is the State or ITO's 
discretion whether the partnering agency must be included on 
communications between USDA and the coordinating agency. The 
coordinating agency will also be responsible for the complete and 
timely submission of any required plans, forms, or reports for the 
Program as a whole including, but not limited to, interim and final 
plans for operations and management, notices of intent, and routine 
reporting to FNS. The coordinating agency does not need to complete or 
submit all required submissions directly to USDA. In some cases, it may 
be more efficient for the partnering agency to send a report it 
generates directly to USDA, and such an arrangement would be 
acceptable. The role of the coordinating agency with regard to 
reporting is to track the State or ITO's progress to ensure plans, 
forms, and reports are submitted timely and accurately, or communicate 
with USDA to request technical assistance or negotiate an alternative 
timeline for submission. The coordinating and partnering Summer EBT 
agency are each responsible for their respective activities as outlined 
in the written agreement with FNS, as well as the effective and 
efficient administration of the Program in accordance with all program 
requirements.
    Accordingly, this delegation of responsibilities is codified at 7 
CFR 292.3
2. Authority To Waive Statute and Regulations
    Section 12(l) of the NSLA, 42 U.S.C 1760(l), provides the Secretary 
with the authority to waive program requirements for States or eligible 
service providers if it is determined that the waiver would facilitate 
the ability of the States or eligible service provider to carry out the 
purpose of the Program, and the waiver will not increase the overall 
cost of the Program to the Federal Government. This waiver authority 
applies to statutory requirements under the NSLA or the Child Nutrition 
Act of 1966 (CNA) (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.) and any regulations issued 
under either Act. The Secretary does not have the authority to waive 
certain requirements including, but not limited to, the nutritional 
content of the meals served, Federal reimbursement rates, or the 
enforcement of any statutory right of any individual. In addition, the 
Secretary may not waive program requirements that originate in other 
laws such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
    The waiver authority at section 12(l) of the NSLA, 42 U.S.C 
1760(l), does not provide the Secretary with the authority to waive 
program requirements for ITOs. To provide flexibility for ITO Summer 
EBT Agencies, this rule establishes that the Secretary may waive or 
modify specific regulatory provisions for the ITO Summer EBT Agency.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking codifies USDA's authority to waive 
statutory and regulatory requirements for State Summer EBT Agencies at 
7 CFR 292.3(f) and regulatory requirements for ITO Summer EBT Agencies 
at 7 CFR 292.3(g).

Subpart B--Participant Eligibility

i. General Purpose and Scope
    Summer EBT is intended to reduce hunger and food insecurity among 
eligible children who lose access to meals during the summer when 
school is not in session. Eligibility is addressed in the NSLA at 
sections 13A(c)(1), 13A(h)(2), and 13A(f)(4), but in general, children 
are eligible for Summer EBT benefits if they are determined to be 
income-eligible for free or reduced price meals based on annual income 
eligibility guidelines for school meal programs published in the 
Federal Register and are enrolled at an NSLP/SBP school, or if they are 
categorically eligible, as defined in this IFR, and school aged, as 
defined by State law.
    This IFR establishes a new subpart B in 7 CFR part 292 that 
codifies eligibility requirements for participants. The provisions in 
this subpart apply to States and ITOs unless otherwise noted.
ii. Eligibility
    Children eligible for Summer EBT include those who, at any point 
during the period of eligibility, are:
    <bullet> School aged as defined by State or ITO law and 
categorically eligible; or
    <bullet> Enrolled in an NSLP/SBP-participating school, other than a 
special provision school, and
    [cir] Categorically eligible;
    [cir] Meet the requirements to receive free or reduced price meals, 
as determined through an NSLP/SBP application;
    [cir] Otherwise determined eligible to receive a free or reduced 
price meal; or
    [cir] Determined eligible through a Summer EBT application.
    <bullet> Enrolled in a special provision school, and
    [cir] Categorically eligible;
    [cir] Meet the requirements to receive free or reduced price meals, 
as

[[Page 90257]]

determined through an NSLP/SBP application; or
    [cir] Determined eligible through a Summer EBT application.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking codifies 7 CFR 292.6 which establishes 
the requirements for eligibility for children for Summer EBT.
iii. Period To Establish Eligibility
    Broadly, eligibility for Summer EBT is based on the income 
eligibility guidelines for free or reduced price meals. Local education 
agency (LEAs) that operate the NSLP/SBP can begin the process of 
certifying student eligibility for free or reduced price school meals 
on or after July 1 of each school year. Therefore, Summer EBT 
eligibility can also be established from July 1 of the prior 
instructional year through the last day of the summer operational 
period. The income eligibility guidelines are updated annually on July 
1 and income guidelines applicable at the time the application is 
submitted will be used to determine eligibility. NSLP and SBP 
regulations also stipulate that eligibility determinations for free or 
reduced price school meals are effective from the date the eligibility 
is established through the last day of the school year. Once a child is 
deemed eligible for school meals through direct certification or an 
application, they may receive free or reduced price meals for the 
entire school year. Children that had an individual eligibility 
determination for school meal benefits during the immediately preceding 
instructional year will have their eligibility automatically carried 
forward into the summer operational period and no further action is 
required for families to receive Summer EBT benefits. In other words, 
for Summer 2024, a child who meets the eligibility criteria anytime 
from July 1, 2023, through the end of a State or ITO's Summer 
operational period in 2024, is eligible for benefits. For example, if a 
child was enrolled in SNAP early in the instructional year (e.g., in 
October 2023), that child would be eligible for Summer EBT during the 
summer of 2024. Another example is if a household is deemed eligible by 
application in August, the child may receive full benefits for that 
summer. This reduces paperwork for families and ensures children are 
offered critical nutrition assistance year-round.
    Eligibility determinations made during the immediately preceding 
instructional year for school meals result in Summer EBT eligibility 
and no further action is required for families. This reduces paperwork 
for families and ensures children are offered critical nutrition 
assistance year-round. Consistent with policy for the NSLP and SBP, 
households are not required to report changes in circumstances during 
the instructional year or summer operational period, but a household 
may voluntarily contact the Summer EBT agency or LEA to report any 
changes in income, household composition, or program participation that 
would change eligibility for Summer EBT.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking codifies 7 CFR 292.7 which establishes 
the period to establish eligibility for the Summer EBT Program.

Subpart C--Requirements of Summer EBT Agencies

    This IFR establishes a new subpart C in 7 CFR part 292 that 
codifies requirements for Summer EBT agencies. These requirements apply 
to State and ITO Summer EBT agencies unless otherwise specified.
i. Program Plan for Operations and Management
    The NSLA requires each State or ITO desiring to participate in 
Summer EBT to notify USDA through the appropriate regional office by 
January 1 of each year of its intent to administer the Program and, by 
February 15, to submit for approval a management and administration 
plan for Summer EBT. ITOs will follow the same requirements as States, 
except when differences in program administration require different 
planning for operations and management. For example, as explained 
below, ITO Summer EBT agencies will need to include information about 
supplemental foods in their plans.
    The statute requiring management and administration plans applies 
to Summer EBT and the SFSP. In the SFSP, this plan is commonly referred 
to by the acronym MAP. For the purposes of Summer EBT, this plan will 
be called a Plan for Operations and Management (POM). The POM must 
address the State or ITO's Summer EBT Program as a whole, even if more 
than one agency participates in program administration. Although POM 
requirements for Summer EBT are codified in the same provision of the 
NSLA as SFSP MAP requirements, Summer EBT plans require coordination 
between administering agencies, which could make it difficult to also 
coordinate development of a single plan with the SFSP-administering 
agency. To ease plan development, States are not obligated to 
coordinate their POM and MAP submissions and may submit a POM that is 
specific to Summer EBT.
    A POM is a planning tool that provides the opportunity for USDA to 
work with Summer EBT agencies on planning, funding training, technical 
assistance, and monitoring. The POM is also an opportunity for State 
Summer EBT agencies and ITO Summer EBT agencies to solidify their plans 
for coordination regarding benefit issuance and the detection and 
prevention of dual participation, as further described in 7 CFR 292.9 
and 292.15(d). POMs detail how the State or ITO will structure its 
program to make the best use of State, ITO, or local-level resources. 
The POM also broadly describes a State or ITO's administration of the 
program including: an administrative budget; a copy of the written 
agreement detailing the roles and responsibilities of each partnering 
agency, if applicable; plans for cooperation between State-administered 
and ITO-administered programs, if applicable; participation estimates; 
details on enrollment processes and the issuance process and cycle; 
program integrity controls; and plans for customer service support. For 
both States and ITOs, the POM will serve as an essential tool to lay 
out plans and procedures to enroll eligible children and to detect and 
prevent dual participation, including children receiving multiple 
allotments from the same State or ITO-administered program, and 
children receiving benefits from more than one State or ITO-
administered program.
    Some States and ITOs have indicated that January 1 and February 15 
are too late in the Summer EBT planning and implementation process for 
these activities to occur without negatively impacting Program 
operations. Summer EBT agencies may need to begin planning for Summer 
EBT as early as the preceding summer and would benefit from early POM 
approval. In addition, USDA will use POMs to forecast the amount of 
funding needed to cover benefit and administrative costs for the 
program year. Accordingly, USDA is modifying the timing of plan 
submissions to facilitate the Summer EBT agency's ability to enact its 
plans in a timely manner and support USDA's budgeting process. 
Therefore, this rule requires Summer EBT agencies, working 
cooperatively when more than one agency will administer the Program 
within a State, to provide notification and submit an interim POM to 
their respective regional office by August 15 of each year for the 
following program year. The interim POM must include the Summer EBT 
agency's forecasted program participation, anticipated administrative 
funding needs as part of an expenditure plan and other

[[Page 90258]]

programmatic information required in the POM to the extent that such 
information has been determined at the time of submission. USDA is 
aware that Summer EBT agencies may not yet have final participation 
numbers or budget estimates at that time; therefore, the information 
included in the interim POM should be the Summer EBT agency's best 
estimates and are subject to revision as more information becomes 
available. Approval of an interim POM is prerequisite for a Summer EBT 
agency to draw down Federal funds to cover USDA's fifty percent share 
of administrative costs. An approved interim POM also provides 
information to aid USDA's budget process and offers an opportunity for 
the regional office to provide technical assistance on the development 
of a final POM, if needed.
    Summer EBT agencies must submit a final POM to their respective 
regional offices by February 15 of each year. The final POM must 
address all POM requirements, as detailed in Sec.  292.8(e) and (f), if 
applicable, and described above, and should reflect the State or ITO's 
final plans for that summer's operations. Approval of a final POM is 
prerequisite for a Summer EBT agency to draw down Federal food benefit 
funds. USDA understands that some Summer EBT agencies may want to 
submit and receive approval for their final POM earlier than February 
15. A final POM may be submitted in lieu of an interim POM by the 
August 15 deadline for interim POM submissions.
    USDA will provide a response to each interim or final POM within 30 
calendar days of receipt. If the POM submitted is not approved, the 
Summer EBT agency and USDA will collaborate to ensure changes to the 
POM, in the form of revisions or amendments, are submitted so the 
interim or final POM can be approved as expeditiously as possible 
following the initial submission. At any time after approval, the 
Summer EBT agency may amend an initial or final POM to reflect changes 
in its program operations. To do this, the Summer EBT agency must 
submit to USDA for approval revisions or amendments signed by the State 
or ITO-designated official responsible for ensuring the Program is 
operated in accordance with the POM. USDA recognizes that it will take 
time for States and ITOs to develop and refine their POMs in the 
initial years of implementation. The Department will work with Summer 
EBT agencies to develop plans that meet the respective submission dates 
and finalize those plans after those dates, if necessary.
    The POM is the avenue through which Summer EBT agencies will 
annually submit their administrative budget and information sufficient 
for USDA to estimate benefit costs for the coming year. This 
administrative budget will identify all costs that will be allocated 
among the Summer EBT agencies, as appropriate. The coordinating Summer 
EBT agency and any partnering Summer EBT agencies may submit separate 
requests for 50 percent funding for administrative expenses, as 
described in 7 CFR 292.20, for the convenience of receiving funds 
without the need to transfer money between Summer EBT agencies. 
However, the budget submissions must be coordinated and submitted 
together in a single interim and final POM (with one expenditure plan 
for each agency that requests administrative funds from USDA) to ensure 
the budgets are consistent with overall program operations and the 
required cost allocations are maintained. Summer EBT agencies will 
submit an expenditure plan along with the POM for State expenditure 
planning. Once the POM is approved, Summer EBT agencies will report 
their incurred administrative expenses on a financial status report and 
draw 50 percent of Federal administrative funding accordingly, on a 
quarterly basis.
    Because Summer EBT benefit funds will be provided as a grant, USDA 
will need to know the amount each Summer EBT agency expects to spend in 
order to provide sufficient funds on a letter of credit for the Summer 
EBT agency that will receive the benefit funds. USDA will use the 
projected participation included in the interim POM to calculate the 
amount of benefit funding needed. USDA anticipates that more accurate 
participation estimates will be included in the final POM. However, 
participation estimates in the initial years of implementation may 
differ from actual participation as Summer EBT agencies hone their 
programs. In the event that participation exceeds estimates, Summer EBT 
agencies may work with their respective regional offices to request an 
increase in their grants to cover all benefit expenses.
    The POM is also the vehicle for Summer EBT agencies to tell USDA 
about their plans for benefit issuance. In the POM, Summer EBT agencies 
must provide the start and end dates of their summer operational 
periods, the dates on which benefits will be issued and when benefits 
will be expunged, and other information about the timing and process 
for providing benefits to eligible households.
    Summer EBT agencies will also use the POM to describe their 
customer service plans. Although Summer EBT Program implementation will 
be a partnership between agencies in most cases, Summer EBT must be a 
unified program from the perspective of participants. USDA heard from 
stakeholders that households participating in P-EBT lacked a clear 
understanding of how the program was administered and where to turn for 
assistance, which was frustrating for households and a barrier to 
access for eligible children. To correct this problem, all Summer EBT 
customer service plans must include a single point of contact for all 
customer service information and inquiries, including a telephone 
hotline and website. In addition, the customer service plan must 
communicate how households can opt out of participating in the Program.
    The Summer EBT demonstration projects provide insight on how States 
and ITOs may meet this customer service requirement. All grantees that 
administered the Summer EBT demonstrations provided households with a 
help desk phone number to call with questions about Summer EBT. Some 
grantees hired temporary staff for their help desk, whiles others 
contracted out their help desk services. Grantees often made changes to 
their help desk operations to better suit the needs of participants. 
For example, some grantees had Community Based Organizations or 
familiar local liaisons run their help desks. Other grantees expanded 
the hours of availability for their help desk.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Abt Associates, (2020). Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer 
for Children, 2015-2018 (expected in early 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ITO Summer EBT agencies will be required to provide information in 
their POMs about program administration that is specific to their model 
of operating the Program and issuing benefits. Each ITO Summer EBT 
agency must include their service area, including a map or other visual 
reference aid in their POM. For purposes of Summer EBT, ITO Service 
Area refers to the geographic area served by an ITO Summer EBT agency. 
In WIC and the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations 
(FDPIR), ITO service areas have typically included reservations, or 
specific Tribal lands in Oklahoma. FNS expects that ITOs will continue 
to use existing Tribal service areas for the purposes of Summer EBT. 
However, if an ITO wishes to serve children in areas beyond typical WIC 
or FDPIR service areas, potentially including other Tribal areas, FNS 
will work with the ITO to modify the service area, as appropriate and 
only applicable to Summer EBT. The POM will also

[[Page 90259]]

address the ITO's plans and procedure for identifying and enrolling 
eligible children.
    An ITO Summer EBT agency's POM must also include a description of 
the benefit delivery model to be used (i.e., a cash-value benefit (CVB) 
model, a food package model, a combination of the two, or an alternate 
model) and must also provide the list of supplemental foods which 
participants can purchase upon enrollment in the Summer EBT Program. 
Specifications for supplemental foods are included in 7 CFR 
292.19(a)(3). Because WIC vendors are authorized by WIC agencies, the 
POM must also address how the ITO Summer EBT agency will support and 
monitor WIC vendors, so they are able to support Summer EBT purchases.
    USDA's intent is for the POM to be an operational blueprint to 
secure funding, document programmatic administrative decisions, provide 
participation and funding projections, and strategize for how to 
strengthen program integrity. It will also be an opportunity for Summer 
EBT agencies and USDA to collaborate to identify innovations and 
address programmatic challenges or improvements. USDA invites comments 
on the extent to which the POM requirements codified in this rulemaking 
are meaningful and useful, and if there are other operational aspects 
that should be addressed in the POM. USDA also requests comments on the 
deadline for submitting the POM to USDA, recognizing that early POM 
submission is needed for Federal financial planning, but the submission 
date must also be practical for Summer EBT agencies.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking codifies 7 CFR 292.8 which establishes 
the requirements for Summer EBT agency submission of the plan for 
operations and management (POM) for Summer EBT.
ii. Coordination Between State-Administered and ITO-Administered Summer 
EBT Programs
    While State and ITO-operated Summer EBT programs will differ 
operationally, the programs may operate in close geographic proximity. 
Accordingly, this IFR details how State and ITO-operated Summer EBT 
programs must coordinate and communicate to ensure efficient and timely 
service to eligible individuals, and prevent duplicative issuance of 
benefits.
    The ITO Summer EBT agency must receive priority consideration to 
serve eligible children within its service area, as identified in its 
FNS-approved POM. This means that children from the ITO's service area 
who can be enrolled through streamlined certification (as described in 
section C iv of this preamble) will automatically be enrolled in the 
ITO-administered Summer EBT Program, to the maximum extent practicable. 
However, children from ITO service areas may opt to participate in the 
State-operated program and opt out of the ITO-operated program if they 
so choose. This approach ensures that ITO-administered Summer EBT 
Programs are the default choice for households in their communities. 
Because the majority of children will be enrolled though streamlined 
certification as described in 7 CFR 292.12(d) and no action will be 
required on the part of the household, ITOs would have a significant 
disadvantage if children in their service areas were automatically 
enrolled in the State-administered Summer EBT Program. ITOs would need 
to expend significant time and resources educating households about 
their benefit and how to opt into the ITO's Program. This burden runs 
contrary to the simplified implementation achieved through streamlined 
certification. Providing priority consideration to ITO Summer EBT 
agencies will allow them to serve their communities with minimal burden 
while also providing households the choice to opt into the State-
administered Program if that is their preference.
    An ITO and a State Summer EBT agency serving proximate geographic 
areas must generally ensure the coordination of Summer EBT program 
services, and this coordination may include a written agreement between 
both parties. In the event that the geographic State is not yet 
operating a Summer EBT Program, the ITO will coordinate with the 
State's designee. If an ITO's service area crosses geographic State 
boundaries, the ITO and each applicable Summer EBT agency, or designee 
of a State covering the geographic area(s) served by the ITO, must 
coordinate services. A key part of State and ITO coordination relates 
to the timely transfer of student eligibility information from the 
State Summer EBT agency to the ITO Summer EBT agency. The State Summer 
EBT agency must share student data with the ITO, including student 
eligibility status and contact information of children deemed eligible 
within the ITO's service area. The State Summer EBT agency must provide 
this information in a manner and timeframe that will allow the ITO 
Summer EBT agency to issue benefits timely. The Summer EBT agency must 
ensure the confidentiality of all student data exchanged that is 
applicable to Summer EBT program eligibility and dual participation; 
and data must only be used for program purposes consistent with 7 CFR 
292.12(c)(2).
    Another key part of State and ITO coordination relates to program 
choice for eligible children in ITO service areas. While the ITO Summer 
EBT agency will receive priority consideration to serve eligible 
children within its service area, eligible households may choose the 
Summer EBT program (ITO or State-operated) in which they will 
participate. To facilitate choice, the ITO Summer EBT agency and the 
State Summer EBT agency must notify eligible children or households 
that they may choose to receive Summer EBT program benefits from either 
the State or the ITO Summer EBT agency. Both agencies must also provide 
referral information to the alternative program upon a child or 
household's request, thereby facilitating household choice. Households 
in the ITO's service area must be informed of the different ITO and 
geographic State programs and should be encouraged to fill out a Summer 
EBT application either through the ITO or geographic State, depending 
on their choice, or a jointly-offered application that allows the 
household to indicate which program is preferred. Regardless of which 
program an eligible household opts into (State-administered or ITO-
administered), the household must opt into that program for the entire 
summer operational period and may not switch programs mid-summer.
    With individual and household choice in place, children living in 
or near an ITO service area could erroneously receive benefits from the 
State and ITO-administered program, which would constitute dual 
participation and is prohibited. Thus, State and ITO Summer EBT 
agencies must coordinate to detect and prevent dual participation in 
the same summer operational period where service areas overlap. 
Additional information on dual participation is located in 7 CFR 
292.15(d).
    USDA seeks public comments on how the Department can facilitate the 
coordination and agreement process with ITOs and State agencies.
iii. State Systems Advance Planning Document Process
    The Handbook 901 Advance Planning Document (APD) process is a 
series of successive steps through which SNAP and WIC State agencies 
obtain prior Federal approval of and Federal financial participation 
(FFP) in automation projects supporting FNS programs. This generally 
includes all

[[Page 90260]]

eligibility system and Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) projects. FNS' 
primary focus in its oversight of State systems is to ensure the 
responsible stewardship of Federal funds used to carry out the mission 
of increasing food security through its domestic nutrition assistance 
programs.
    For the purposes of Summer EBT, this rulemaking requires States and 
ITOs to adhere to the APD process for EBT projects. To implement Summer 
EBT, States and ITOs will likely need to build new or modify existing 
eligibility systems. Although SNAP agencies and WIC ITOs may need to 
make some modifications to their eligibility systems to support Summer 
EBT, it is expected Child Nutrition Program (CNP) agencies will need to 
make more significant system changes in order to collect and manage 
data not currently collected at the State level in Child Nutrition 
Programs. FNS has not historically used the APD process for CNP 
eligibility systems and the Agency has determined that adding APD 
requirements for CNP agencies would take more time and planning than is 
available. Therefore, the APD process for Summer EBT will only apply to 
EBT systems development, and Summer EBT eligibility systems that are 
part of existing SNAP or WIC eligibility systems currently subject to 
the APD process. USDA will consider extending the APD process to CNP 
systems if it is determined that the APD process will support effective 
and efficient CNP systems development. USDA invites comments on the APD 
process for Summer EBT and the benefits and challenges of adding APD 
requirements for CNP agencies.
    As noted in the definitions section of this preamble [subpart A of 
this rulemaking], this rulemaking codifies several definitions related 
to the APD process including: Advance Planning Document for project 
planning or Planning APD (APD or PAPD), Advance Planning Document 
Update (APDU), Enhancement, and Implementation Advance Planning 
Document or Implementation APD (IAPD). These definitions largely match 
how these terms are defined in SNAP regulations with the exception that 
they are modified to limit the applicability of Summer EBT APD 
requirements to EBT systems. Recognizing that ITOs are more familiar 
with the APD process that exists for WIC EBT and Management Information 
systems (MIS), the APD section includes language for ITOs that is more 
aligned with the WIC regulations.
    In accordance with these new requirements, Summer EBT agencies must 
adhere to the APD process as prescribed by appropriate FNS directives 
and guidance (e.g., FNS Handbook 901) and in this Part as a condition 
for initial and continuing authority to claim Federal financial 
participation (FFP) for the costs of the planning, development, 
acquisition, installation and implementation of Information System (IS) 
equipment and services used in the administration of the Summer EBT 
Program. APD requirements for Summer EBT may be included in existing 
APDs developed for SNAP or WIC EBT services or may be a separate APD 
specific to Summer EBT services.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking establishes 7 CFR 292.11 which extends 
the APD process to Summer EBT agencies to for the development of EBT 
and eligibility systems operated by SNAP agencies and WIC ITOs.
iv. Enrolling Eligible Children
    Broadly speaking, children eligible for Summer EBT are those who 
are eligible for free or reduced price school meals. See subpart B of 
this preamble for the definition and a discussion of Summer EBT 
eligibility. The statute includes specific requirements related to how 
State Summer EBT agencies must enroll children who are eligible for 
Summer EBT benefits, which are codified in subpart C of this 
rulemaking. Consistent with the statute, USDA can work with ITO Summer 
EBT agencies to modify enrollment requirements, if needed, to enable an 
ITO to meet the requirements to the maximum extent practicable, as 
indicated in 7 CFR 292.12. USDA has identified elements of the 
enrollment process that could pose challenges for ITOs and, as 
necessary, USDA will work with ITOs on a case-by-case basis to approve 
alternative implementation approaches that will achieve the same or 
similar outcome as the corresponding regulation. These elements are 
noted in their respective sections below.
    The statute specifies that Summer EBT agencies must enroll children 
automatically, without further application when they are able to be 
directly certified, are an identified student, or otherwise determined 
by the SFA to be eligible for free or reduced price meals. This type of 
automatic enrollment (i.e., enrollment that does not require a 
household to actively apply for benefits) will reduce burden on 
households of children who may be identified as eligible using existing 
administrative data. For the purposes of Summer EBT, means-tested 
program data for streamlined certification does not need to be matched 
with school records so long as the child was of school-age during the 
period of eligibility, as defined in 7 CFR 292.2. The result is a 
simplified process that allows the Summer EBT agency to issue benefits 
to children based on their individual certification for free or reduced 
price school meals from the immediately preceding school year, or 
income eligibility and age, without the need for matching with school 
records. This process is detailed below in Subsection 2, Streamlined 
certification. The following text of subpart C applies to State and 
ITO-administered Programs. Eligibility for Programs administered by a 
Territory is discussed in subpart B.
v. Database for NSLP/SBP Enrollment
    During USDA-hosted listening sessions with State SNAP and Child 
Nutrition agencies, and at the School Nutrition Association's Annual 
National Conference, agencies and stakeholders provided feedback that a 
State or ITO-level database with school meal enrollment data would help 
to facilitate the data sharing and enrollment processes. In addition, a 
State or ITO-level database could be used to detect and prevent 
duplicate benefit issuance and increase data integrity across the 
Summer EBT program. However, without a Federal requirement, Summer EBT 
agencies may have difficulty implementing such a database on their own. 
Therefore, by 2025, Summer EBT agencies will be required to establish 
and maintain a State- or ITO-wide database of children who are enrolled 
in NSLP- or SBP-participating schools within the State or ITO service 
area, as applicable, for the purposes of enrolling eligible children 
for Summer EBT efficiently and with integrity. This delay in 
implementation until 2025 gives Summer EBT agencies time to acquire the 
funding and for database development; however, USDA welcomes comments 
on the implementation timeline. Also, USDA recognizes that many States 
already have statewide databases that they can repurpose. For States 
that will need to build one, FNS is exploring possible funding sources 
to help cover the costs of these initial investments. USDA is also 
prepared to provide technical assistance and support, as needed, and 
help States and ITOs develop low-tech and/or low-cost solutions that 
work within the State or ITO's budget and capabilities. ITOs may have 
different resources or needs that prevent them from establishing an 
ITO-wide database or that make a database impracticable or not needed 
for effective program administration. If an ITO, in consultation with 
USDA, determines

[[Page 90261]]

that establishing and maintaining a database meeting the requirements 
of this section is not feasible or is unnecessary based on their method 
of enrolling children, the ITO may submit for USDA approval alternate 
plans for how to enroll children for Summer EBT benefits and detect and 
prevent duplicate benefit issuance.
    The database will include, at a minimum, a child's name, date of 
birth, school or district where they are enrolled, mailing address, 
their individual free or reduced price eligibility status (as 
applicable),\9\ and any other information needed to issue benefits 
timely. Summer EBT agencies must ensure the confidentiality of all such 
data, and the data must be used only for the purposes of the Summer EBT 
Program, or for the purpose of use or disclosure to provide other 
social service benefits to eligible children. Additionally, State 
Summer EBT agencies must make the data available to any applicable ITO 
Summer EBT agencies for children within an ITO's service area in a 
timeframe that allows the ITO Summer EBT agency to issue timely 
benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The free or reduced price status must be for the 
instructional year immediately preceding the summer operational 
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    USDA invites comments on the minimum data elements that are 
necessary to confirm NSLP/SBP enrollment, and to detect and prevent 
duplicate benefit issuance within and across States and ITOs. 
Additionally, USDA invites comments on the timing of database updates 
and file transfer to the EBT processors in order to issue benefits on 
time.
    Accordingly, the requirement for Summer EBT agencies to establish 
and maintain a State or ITO-wide database is codified in 7 CFR 
292.12(c).
vi. Streamlined Certification
    To support efficient enrollment of eligible children, the statute 
establishes a process that requires Summer EBT agencies to provide 
benefits to children who already have an individual eligibility 
determination for the school meal programs under the procedures at 7 
CFR 245.6 or who can be identified as income-eligible through 
administrative data at the State level without the need for further 
data matching. The statute refers to the latter group as children who 
are ``able to be directly certified.'' In the school meal programs, 
under 7 CFR 245.2, direct certification means determining a child is 
eligible for free meals or free milk, as applicable, based on 
documentation obtained directly from the appropriate State or local 
agency or individuals authorized to certify that the child is a member 
of a household receiving assistance under SNAP, as defined in this 
section; is a member of a household receiving assistance under FDPIR or 
under the TANF program, as defined in Sec.  245.2 is a Foster child, 
Homeless child, a Migrant child, a Head Start child and a Runaway 
child, as defined in Sec.  245.2.
    The process used to certify these children as eligible for free or 
reduced price school meals involves data sharing between State and/or 
local agencies administering those assistance programs with the State 
and/or local agencies administering the school meal programs. This 
information is then matched against NSLP-participating school 
enrollment lists. Positive matches confer student-level eligibility for 
free or reduced price school meals.
    For Summer EBT, a similar process will be used and will be referred 
to as ``streamlined certification'' or ``SC''. Each State's SC process 
will look different based on their unique operations. The following 
steps describe one possible method by which SC may be implemented.
    1. State or local agencies that administer the school meal programs 
will share a list of all students who have an individual eligibility 
determination \10\ for free or reduced price meals with the Summer EBT 
agency that will issue the EBT benefits. Sources of this data include 
applications for free or reduced price meals that were processed by the 
LEA, direct certification, or categorical eligibility determinations 
made at the LEA level. The eligibility database discussed in the 
previous section will help facilitate the sharing of information for 
purposes of Summer EBT participation only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The free or reduced price status must be for the 
instructional year immediately preceding the summer operational 
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The EBT issuing agency will then take participation lists from 
SNAP and other programs used for directly certifying children for 
school meals, such as TANF and FDPIR, as well as other means-tested 
programs that are approved by the Secretary for use in Summer EBT,\11\ 
and remove children who are not school aged. School aged is defined as 
the compulsory age of school attendance in that State and will be 
discussed further below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Summer EBT agencies that would like to use additional 
programs, such as Medicaid, to identify and issue benefits to 
eligible children through SC must include them in the POM, along 
with a detailed justification for how the program's eligibility 
standards and certification processes provide assurance that 
participating children also meet the school meal eligibility 
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Those lists from Step 2, along with the list of students that 
have an individual eligibility determination for free or reduced price 
meals from Step 1 will then be merged, and duplicate entries will be 
removed.
    4. This list of streamlined certified children will be issued 
Summer EBT benefits without the need to apply.
    Consistent with the statute, children who are identified through 
streamlined certification do not need to be matched against an NSLP/SBP 
enrollment list prior to issuance if they are school age or already 
certified for free or reduced price meals in the NSLP/SBP. As a result, 
some children who are school-age and categorically eligible, as defined 
in this IFR, but are not enrolled in a school that participates in the 
NSLP or SBP, will be issued Summer EBT benefits. These children are 
eligible for Summer EBT benefits as long as they are school-aged during 
the period of eligibility. USDA anticipates that this will be a very 
small percentage of eligible children.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Ranalli, Dennis, Templin, Joe, & Applebaum, Maggie, (2021). 
Direct Certification in the National School Lunch Program, State 
Implementation Progress Report to Congress, School Year 2017-2018 & 
School Year 2018-2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The compulsory age of school attendance aligns with individual 
State or ITO requirements for school enrollment. Issuing benefits to 
all children of compulsory school age who can be streamline certified 
aims to simplify the identification of students who are school aged. 
However, eligible children younger or older than the compulsory age of 
attendance who attend an NSLP/SBP school will still be enrolled in 
Summer EBT through school-level data or, if their eligibility for 
Summer EBT has not already been established, using a Summer EBT 
application. USDA recognizes that there may be other effective methods 
of identifying eligible children through streamlined certification 
using means-tested program data available at the State or ITO-level. 
USDA invites comments on other approaches to define the age range for 
children who can be streamline certified using State or ITO-level data. 
Specifically, how many eligible children attend NSLP/SBP schools who 
are below or above the compulsory age of school attendance? Are there 
specific technical barriers that prevent these children from being 
enrolled in Summer EBT using school-level data or Summer EBT 
applications? What is the actual age range for NSLP/SBP school 
attendance in a State or ITO? How many children in that range

[[Page 90262]]

do not attend an NSLP/SBP school? Do these children attend other 
institutions operating year-round, such as year-round childcare 
programs?
    In summary, through the SC process, States and ITOs will be able to 
issue benefits to a significant portion of eligible children using only 
data that are already available at the LEA, State, or ITO level. USDA 
anticipates the SC process will reduce burden on States and ITOs and 
make the process of enrolling children more efficient.
    As noted above, ITOs participating in Summer EBT must, to the 
maximum extent practicable, meet the requirements of this section. If 
an ITO, in consultation with USDA, determines that any element of 
automatic enrollment with streamlined certification is not feasible or 
is unnecessary based on available resources, the ITO may submit for 
USDA approval alternate plans for how to efficiently enroll children 
with minimal burden for households.
    Accordingly, this subsection codifies requirements for the 
streamlined certification process at Sec.  292.12(d).
2. Applications
    The statute requires Summer EBT agencies to make an application 
available to children enrolled in NSLP and/or SBP-participating schools 
who have not been certified through the SC process. In other words, 
children enrolled in an NSLP/SBP school who do not have individual 
eligibility determinations during the period of eligibility for Summer 
EBT must submit a Summer EBT application and be determined eligible in 
order to participate in the Program.
    Summer EBT applications are ultimately the Summer EBT agency's 
responsibility. Recognizing that Summer EBT agencies may need 
operational flexibilities as they launch their programs, in Summer 2024 
only, Summer EBT agencies may compel LEAs to process Summer EBT 
applications; however, any costs incurred by LEAs attributable 
specifically to processing Summer EBT applications must be fully 
reimbursed by the Summer EBT agency. Starting in 2025, Summer EBT 
agencies may not delegate to LEAs the responsibility of making a Summer 
EBT application available. However, a Summer EBT agency may contract 
with another entity into order to fulfill this requirement, including 
with LEAs. USDA recognizes that States and ITOs do not currently handle 
school meal applications and will not immediately have the systems and 
processes needed to process Summer EBT applications. Therefore, the 
State or ITO-level application will not be required until 2025, 
allowing time for States and ITOs to develop an application. To also 
provide relief in the initial year of Summer EBT implementation, USDA 
is allowing flexibility in the contents of the application for Summer 
EBT, which is discussed in detail below. Additionally, the Summer EBT 
agency may establish a system for executing household applications 
electronically and using electronic signatures provided that the 
electronic application meets the same requirements as paper 
applications. If the application is made available electronically, a 
paper version must also be available.
    Since Summer EBT applications could be accepted and processed by an 
entity other than the LEA where the child is enrolled, they must be 
matched against an NSLP/SBP enrollment list prior to benefits being 
issued to ensure the child is eligible as defined in 7 CFR 292.5 and 
292.6. Matching against NSLP/SBP enrollment lists is not required for 
children who were approved for school meal benefits with an NSLP/SBP 
application. These children are streamline certified for Summer EBT 
benefits and do not need to be matched against an NSLP/SBP enrollment 
list prior to issuance, as their eligibility determination originated 
from the NSLP/SBP participating school where they are enrolled. In the 
case of households that move mid-summer, those children may have 
already been issued benefits in their previous State through 
streamlined certification. If they are a household that needs to apply 
through a Summer EBT application, they should apply in the State where 
they finished the prior school year because Summer EBT agencies are 
required to match against prior school year NSLP/SBP enrollment lists 
before issuing benefits. An application submitted in a State where the 
household recently moved would come up negative in a school enrollment 
check. SNAP benefits are interoperable, which means they can be used in 
any SNAP-authorized retailer in the United States regardless of where 
they were issued, so households can use the benefits issued by their 
previous State of residence. States must communicate to households in 
their Program materials informing them that, if they plan to move or 
have recently moved, they will be issued benefits in the State where 
their child(ren) completed the most recent school year. In order to 
minimize duplicate participation, the self-attestation statement on the 
Summer EBT application must include language affirming that the 
applicant is not already receiving Summer EBT benefits in another State 
or ITO. FNS will work with ITOs to determine the best way to convey 
eligibility and use of benefits for children enrolled in an ITO program 
who move during the summer.
    The statutory requirement to provide an application for children 
who are not otherwise certified is in reference to children enrolled in 
an NSLP/SBP school, e.g., children enrolled at standard counting and 
claiming NSLP/SBP schools who have not completed an NSLP application 
and are not directly certified, and children enrolled at special 
provision schools who are not directly certified. Therefore, 
applications are limited to children enrolled in NSLP/SBP schools. 
Summer EBT applications cannot be used as a means of establishing 
Summer EBT eligibility for children not enrolled in an NSLP/SBP school.
    Further, Summer EBT applications must be available to households of 
children enrolled in NSLP/SBP schools during the entire summer 
operational period. Children enrolled in an NSLP/SBP school who become 
eligible during the summer or failed to apply before the end of the 
school year, must have an opportunity to establish their eligibility by 
completing an application. Summer EBT agencies are permitted to 
encourage applications to be submitted before the last day of the 
summer operational period. For example, in communications to 
households, Summer EBT agencies would be permitted to say, ``In order 
to receive Summer EBT benefits for this summer, please submit your 
application no later than August 1st.'' However, eligible households 
that submit applications on or before the last day of the summer 
operational period, must be issued Summer EBT benefits no later than 15 
operational days after submission. USDA recognizes that, in these 
limited cases, benefits will be issued after the summer operational 
period has ended. Households will not be permitted to apply, and 
therefore will not be approved for benefits, after the last day of the 
summer operational period.
    Given that the income eligibility criteria for Summer EBT is the 
same as for school meal programs, applications for Summer EBT will 
largely need to collect the same information as applications for those 
programs. Summer EBT applications should be clear and simple in design, 
but must meet a minimum set of standards, as outlined below.
    Per 7 CFR 292.13(i), all Summer EBT applications must:

[[Page 90263]]

    <bullet> Be in an understandable and uniform format and to the 
maximum extent practicable, in a language that parents and guardians 
can understand;
    <bullet> Require the income received by each household member 
identified by source of income;
    <bullet> Require applicants to provide the names of all household 
members for whom application is made, including children;
    <bullet> Contain space for applicants to indicate a categorical 
eligibility status or provide existing case numbers associated with 
participation in other Federal programs (SNAP, TANF, FDPIR, etc.):
    <bullet> Be signed by an adult member of the household;
    <bullet> Require the name of the school where the child(ren) is/are 
enrolled;
    <bullet> Contain space for the household's mailing address;
    <bullet> Contain the use of information statement, categorical 
eligibility statement, and information disclosure statement;
    <bullet> Contain space for the adult household member signing the 
form to attest that the information is true and accurate;
    <bullet> Contain the USDA nondiscrimination statement; and
    <bullet> Contain space for optional collection of information on 
race and ethnicity of applicants.
    The requirements above reflect most of the basic requirements for 
NSLP/SBP applications at 7 CFR 245.6(a)(6), with the exception of the 
Social Security Number requirement. Per section 9(d)(1) of the NSLA, 
households that complete NSLP/SBP applications are required to provide 
the last four digits of the Social Security Number of an adult member 
of the household or an indication that the adult does not have one. 
However, the statutory provision at 9(d)(1) does not apply to Summer 
EBT applications. Therefore, it will not be required for Summer EBT 
applications. An application must also be accepted and processed as 
complete even if the address field was not completed by the applicant. 
In the event that no address or an incomplete address is provided, the 
Summer EBT agency should work with the LEA or other relevant agencies 
to obtain current contact information for the child and place the card 
in the mail or arrange another method of delivering the card (e.g., 
through a school social worker). In addition, Summer EBT agencies are 
prohibited from requiring documentation from households at the time of 
application. Documentation of income is only required during the 
verification process, which is detailed in the next section.
    USDA recognizes that many LEAs with special provision schools have 
identified the need for the type of income information that was 
formerly collected through NSLP/SBP applications. To meet this need, 
some LEAs collect alternative income applications. Data collected 
through alternative income applications serves the same function as 
NSLP/SBP application data in many special provision schools and is used 
for purposes not related to the school meal programs, such as 
determining education funding allocations, and other student benefits. 
These applications are familiar to households and, in many cases, 
collect enough information to determine whether the household is at or 
below the NSLP/SBP reduced price income threshold. States and LEAs that 
utilize alternative income applications may have already started the 
application preparation and distribution process for school year 2023-
2024, and there may not be sufficient time to modify alternative income 
applications to accommodate the Summer EBT applications requirements 
listed above or create a new Summer EBT-compliant application. 
Therefore, to provide administrative flexibility, in Summer 2024 only, 
alternative income applications that are currently used in some special 
provision schools may be used to confer eligibility for Summer EBT if 
the application allows a Summer EBT agency or LEA to determine whether 
the household is income eligible. USDA provided early implementation 
guidance on the use of alternative income applications in 2024 in SEBT 
03-2023, Summer EBT Eligibility, Certification, and Verification, July 
31, 2023. States and LEAs are not required to use their alternative 
income applications for Summer EBT in 2024 and may utilize existing 
NSLP/SBP applications, including the USDA Prototype Application for 
Free and Reduced Price School Meals.\13\ USDA anticipates that 
providing this flexibility for 2024 will ease implementation burden for 
those LEAs that have already issued alternative income applications and 
would otherwise need to ask households to submit an additional 
application for 2024 Summer EBT benefits. In many cases, LEAs developed 
and used alternative income applications for purposes other than Summer 
EBT and the data from those already-collected forms may be used to 
establish eligibility for Summer EBT in 2024. Therefore, Summer EBT 
agencies are not required to reimburse LEAs for expenses routinely 
incurred in the processing of alternative income forms; the Summer EBT 
agency is only responsible for new administrative costs that were 
incurred for the purposes of Summer EBT eligibility. USDA recognizes 
that the application requirement for children attending CEP schools for 
children who are not streamlined certified may be challenging for 
Summer EBT agencies. USDA stands ready to support Summer EBT agencies 
in the implementation of this requirement, as CEP expansion has 
continued to be pursued through recent rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Applying for Free and Reduced Price School Meals [verbar] 
Food and Nutrition Service (usda.gov)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    USDA invites comments on the application requirements of this IFR. 
Specifically, what challenges will there be with administering the 
Summer EBT application at the Summer EBT agency level? What are the 
benefits of processing Summer EBT applications at the Summer EBT agency 
level?
    Consistent with current regulations for the school meal programs, 
Summer EBT agencies must comply with requirements for the handling of 
child data including who is authorized to receive eligibility 
information, and disclosure of eligibility information for Program 
purposes. This rulemaking also establishes penalties for unauthorized 
disclosure or misuse of such information.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking established requirements for the 
provision and use of Summer EBT applications at 7 CFR 292.13.
3. Verification
    In order to ensure program quality and integrity, Summer EBT 
agencies must have adequate processes in place to correctly determine 
the eligibility of children for Summer EBT benefits. Verification of 
Summer EBT applications will be required as a method to maximize 
program integrity.
    For the purpose of Summer EBT, verification is the process through 
which applicants using a Summer EBT application are confirmed eligible 
for Summer EBT benefits by first matching against administrative data, 
and if not able to be confirmed, by then examining information provided 
by the applicant. However, as discussed above, the majority of Summer 
EBT participants will be enrolled through the streamlined certification 
process and will not be subject to the Summer EBT application 
verification requirements.
    For Summer EBT applications, the verification process will align 
with the NLSP/SBP approach to verification, which is conducted after 
the initial eligibility determination of a self-

[[Page 90264]]

attested income application. USDA heard from stakeholder engagement and 
listening sessions with Child Nutrition and SNAP State Agencies that 
implemented P-EBT that the requirement to verify all applications 
before P-EBT benefits could be issued (often referred to as up-front 
verification or documentation at time of application) was burdensome 
for both program administrators and households. Up-front verification 
requiring household contact and documentation is time-consuming and may 
delay the issuance of benefits which may result in children not 
receiving benefits during the Summer. Child Nutrition Programs, like 
NSLP/SBP and the Child and Adult Care Food Program, do not require up-
front household income verification. Rather they require verification 
of a subset of applications after certification. For Summer EBT, Summer 
EBT agencies will be required to verify three percent of applications, 
chosen at random after an initial eligibility determination is made. A 
three-percent sample size for Summer EBT aligns with the sample size 
required for NSLP/SBP. Although applications that are subject to 
verification will be processed and an eligibility determination will be 
made before verification occurs, households selected for verification 
may not be issued Summer EBT benefits until the verification process is 
complete and household eligibility is confirmed. This approach strikes 
a balance by not requiring up-front verification, while also promoting 
Program integrity by reviewing a sample of applications and delaying 
release of Program benefits until eligibility is confirmed. If, as a 
result of verification for cause, a child who has already been issued 
benefits is determined ineligible for the Program, the Summer EBT 
agency must stop further benefit issuances, in cases where the Summer 
EBT agency has chosen to issue benefits in multiple issuances.
    For the random, three-percent sample, Summer EBT agencies must base 
the calculation on the number of approved applications on file as of 
April 1 during the instructional year immediately preceding the summer 
operational period. However, Summer EBT agencies are allowed, and 
encouraged, to conduct verification on a rolling basis. Rolling 
verification, as defined in Sec.  292.14(c), is an operational 
flexibility also used by LEAs to conduct verification for school meal 
applications. Rolling verification involves selecting more than one 
sample, however the last sample must still be selected on April 1, and 
be equal to 3% of total approved applications received up to April 1. 
Applications submitted after April 1 will still be subject to 
verification for cause, as applicable, but will not be subject to 
random selection. Summer EBT agencies are strongly encouraged to 
communicate an application deadline prior to April 1 in order to 
maximize program integrity, while also limiting administrative burden 
during the summer months, however as described above, households must 
not be prevented from applying at any point during the period of 
eligibility. A letter communicating this to households could say, ``In 
order to receive Summer EBT benefits prior to the start of summer, 
please submit your application no later than March 1.''
    Rolling verification is encouraged for Summer EBT because of the 
longer period of time between when households will likely complete a 
Summer EBT application (late summer or fall) and when the benefits will 
be issued (the following summer). Summer EBT agencies that reach out to 
households selected for verification may be more likely to reach them 
if the contact is made closer to the date of application when the 
household's contact information or mailing address is more recent. 
Additionally, rolling verification may ease the administrative burden 
associated with the verification process by distributing tasks and 
responsibilities over a longer period of time. In practice, conducting 
verification on a rolling basis (e.g., weekly or monthly) helps 
mitigate a possible rush of document processing and follow-up 
communications that may occur when sampling and household outreach 
occur at a single point in time.
    In lieu of selecting a three-percent random verification sample, 
Summer EBT agencies may propose alternative methods for verification 
that strengthen program integrity and preserve participant access. 
Alternative approaches must still comply with all other provisions 
related to applications and verification, including the provisions at 7 
CFR 292.14(f) related to procedures and assistance to households, and 
the restriction at 7 CFR 292.12(e)(4) that prohibits Summer EBT 
agencies from requiring up front documentation. Summer EBT agencies 
that intend to propose alternative procedures must include a detailed 
description of their plan in their POM submission, and proposals are 
subject to USDA approval.
    Additionally, Summer EBT applications (or alternative income 
applications for Summer 2024) will be subject to verification for 
cause, a process through which questionable applications are verified 
on a case-by-case basis. Questionable applications might include those 
with conflicting or inconsistent information. For example, if a 
household submits two separate applications with different information, 
a Summer EBT agency may choose to verify that application for cause on 
the basis that the household submitted inconsistent or conflicting 
information. Also, applications may be verified for cause after the 
initial application processing, such as when a Summer EBT agency 
becomes aware of a questionable application after the application is 
certified. Summer EBT agencies must ensure that verification efforts 
are applied without regard to race, sex (including gender identity and 
sexual orientation), color, national origin, age, or disability. 
Verification for cause is defined in 7 CFR 292.2 and is described in 
detail in 7 CFR 292.14.
    USDA recognizes that getting households to respond to verification 
requests will be challenging for Summer EBT staff. If households do not 
respond, they lose their benefits regardless of their true eligibility, 
and, in subsequent years non-respondents will also need to submit 
documentation at the time of application in order to be approved for 
Summer EBT benefits. The Summer EBT agency may, on a case-by-case 
basis, replace up to ten percent of applications that are randomly 
selected as part of the verification sample if the Summer EBT agency 
has knowledge of the applicant that they would be unlikely or unable to 
satisfactorily respond to the verification request. For example, if a 
Summer EBT agency has current, reliable data confirming that a 
household that was selected for verification is experiencing 
homelessness, they may randomly select a different application to 
verify instead.
    Further, to better capture eligible children and reduce burden 
associated with verification, Summer EBT agencies must conduct direct 
verification, as defined in 7 CFR 292.2, prior to contacting the 
households that are selected as part of the random three (3) percent 
verification sample. Summer EBT agencies must conduct direct 
verification activities with the eligible programs defined for the 
purposes of streamlined certification at 7 CFR 292.12(d) and must also 
use other sources of administrative data such as State Income and 
Eligibility Verification Systems (IEVS) data, tax records, wage 
databases, or other sources available to the Summer EBT agency if 
approved by the Secretary. Depending on the data source, records may be 
used to verify income and/or program participation. Data sources that 
the Summer EBT

[[Page 90265]]

agency intends to use for direct verification, along with the 
description of the process, must be included in the annual POM 
submission. Applications that are confirmed through the direct 
verification process should not be contacted for verification.
    If an application cannot be confirmed through direct verification, 
households selected for verification must be notified in writing that 
their applications were selected for verification. The written 
statement must include a telephone number to contact for assistance, 
and any communications with households concerning verification must be 
in an understandable and uniform format and, to the maximum extent 
practicable, in a language that parents and guardians can understand. 
The notice must include a description the type of acceptable 
information or documents, as well as the date by which they need to 
respond, and that they may instead request that the Summer EBT agency 
contact the appropriate officials to confirm that their children are 
foster, homeless, migrant, or runaway. Households must also be informed 
that failure to cooperate with verification efforts will result in the 
termination of benefits.
    During the verification process, the Summer EBT agency must make at 
least two attempts, at least one week apart, to contact any household 
that does not respond to a verification request. The attempt may be 
through a telephone call, email, or mail, and must be documented. A 
household will be considered a non-respondent if there was no response, 
or an incomplete or ambiguous response that does not permit the Summer 
EBT agency to resolve the child's eligibility for Summer EBT benefits.
    Households must also be notified if as a result of verification, 
they are determined to be ineligible. The notice must include the 
reason(s) for the determination, notification of the right to appeal 
and when the appeal must be filed, instructions for how to appeal, and 
notification of the right to reapply at any time.
    For the purposes of both regular verification and direct 
verification, documentation may indicate participation in an applicable 
program or income at any point during the period of eligibility. The 
information provided only needs to indicate eligibility at a single 
point in time during the period of eligibility, not that the child was 
eligible at the time of application or verification. Such documentation 
may include written evidence, information from individuals outside of 
the child's household who can verify the child's circumstances, and 
systems of records. Written evidence includes written confirmation of a 
household's circumstances, such as wage stubs, award letters, and 
letters from employers. Whenever written evidence is insufficient to 
confirm income information on the application or current eligibility, 
the Summer EBT agency may use individuals outside of the child's 
household who can verify the child's circumstances including but not 
limited to: employers, social service agencies, school officials, and 
migrant agencies. The Summer EBT agency may also accept a statement 
from an adult member of the child's household when other forms of 
documentation are not available. In such a situation, the Summer EBT 
agency shall annotate the application for such child documenting the 
basis of verifying the child's eligibility.
    USDA stands ready to support Summer EBT agencies in implementing 
verification procedures so as to limit the number of eligible families 
that might not receive a Summer EBT benefit as a result of the 
verification process. Additionally, USDA developed a Verification 
Toolkit for use by LEAs in the NSLP that may also be useful to Summer 
EBT agencies conducting verification of Summer EBT applications. The 
Toolkit contains a collection of resources that LEAs can use in their 
efforts to improve verification response rates and the overall 
efficiency of the process. Information on direct verification, 
including a description of types of direct verification, timing, and 
guidance on follow up activities is included the Eligibility Manual for 
School Meals Determining and Verifying Eligibility.
    States and ITOs must establish procedures to carry out verification 
as described in this section and include those procedures in their 
annual POM submission, as described in 7 CFR 292.8(d)(8). Although ITOs 
do not currently conduct verification unless they also operate NSLP/SBP 
schools, USDA has determined that it is appropriate for ITOs to 
complete the full verification process for Summer EBT. Verification 
plays a critical role in promoting program integrity and provides 
information that can help program operators improve their certification 
process. Many of the steps in the verification process are designed to 
prevent eligible participants from being denied benefits. As such, ITO-
operated Summer EBT programs and program participants will benefit from 
the ITO Summer EBT agency completing the verification process as 
prescribed in these regulations. However, USDA recognizes that ITO 
Summer EBT agencies will need support conducting verification, 
particularly in the early years of implementation. The Department will 
work with ITO Summer EBT agencies to train staff on the verification 
process, provide guidance materials that are clear and easy to follow, 
resources to help explain the process to families, and provide ongoing 
technical assistance to ITO Summer EBT agencies as they develop their 
verification processes. NSLP schools in the Territories that conduct 
NSLP verification should continue to do so; there will not be a 
separate or additional verification requirement for NSLP applications 
used for eligibility for Summer EBT.
    USDA invites comments on the verification requirements of this IFR. 
Specifically:
    <bullet> What are the considerations around staffing that USDA 
should be aware of?
    <bullet> Is April 1 the best time to select a sample and start 
verification, both in terms of the timing of when most applications are 
received, and the process of preparing to issue benefits?
    <bullet> Are there additional data sources that could be used to 
conduct direct verification that could limit outreach to households and 
limit administrative burden?
    <bullet> Are there alternative approaches to verification that 
appropriately balance burden and program integrity?
    <bullet> Does rolling verification increase household response 
rates?
    <bullet> Does rolling verification help alleviate administrative 
burden?
    <bullet> Should there be different timeframes or requirements for 
verification, the follow-up activities, and benefit issuance?
    <bullet> What are the specific criteria that should be used for 
targeting high-risk applications, and should Summer EBT agencies be 
required to verify certain high-risk applications for cause?
    <bullet> How can Summer EBT agencies ensure verification efforts 
are applied without regard to race, sex (including gender identity and 
sexual orientation), color, national origin, age, or disability.
    <bullet> What are the challenges and benefits of verifying 
applications at the Summer EBT agency level?
4. Notification of Eligibility, Denial, Appeal Rights, and the Ability 
to Opt-Out
    The Summer EBT agency must notify the household of a child's 
eligibility status. Households with children whose eligibility is 
established through SC must be notified, in writing, that their 
children are eligible for Summer EBT and that no application is 
required. For agencies that administer the school meal

[[Page 90266]]

programs, this will be similar to the Notice of Direct Certification. 
Households that establish eligibility through an application must be 
notified of the child's eligibility determination (or notification must 
be placed in the mail) by the Summer EBT agency within 15 operational 
days of receiving a complete application. Summer EBT agencies must also 
develop a process to enable anyone who has been determined to be 
eligible for Summer EBT benefits to see that they are eligible and 
unenroll, or opt-out, of the Program if they prefer. Therefore, the 
notice of eligibility and enrollment must inform the household how to 
opt-out if they do not want their child(ren) to receive Summer EBT 
benefits. Children from households that notify the Summer EBT agency 
that they do not want Summer EBT benefits should not be issued benefits 
or must have their benefits discontinued as soon as possible if already 
issued. Any notification from the household declining benefits must be 
documented and maintained on file, as required under 7 CFR 292.23, to 
substantiate any change in benefits. Households that opt out of the 
Program may contact their Summer EBT agency at any time before the end 
of the summer operational period to request reenrollment.
    The Summer EBT agency must provide written notification to a 
household denied because their application is not complete or does not 
meet the eligibility criteria for Summer EBT benefits within 15 
operational days of receiving a complete application. At a minimum, the 
notice to families must include the reason for the denial of benefits, 
notification of the household's right to appeal the decision, 
instructions on how to appeal, and a statement reminding households 
that they may reapply for benefits at any time. The Summer EBT agency 
must document and retain the reasons for ineligibility and must retain 
the denied application.
    A household wanting to appeal a denied application may do so in 
accordance with the procedures established by the Summer EBT agency as 
required by 7 CFR 292.26. Prior to initiating the hearing procedure, 
the household may request a conference to provide the opportunity for 
the household to discuss the situation, present information, and obtain 
an explanation of the data submitted in the application or the decision 
rendered. The request for a conference must not in any way prejudice or 
diminish the right to a fair hearing. The Summer EBT agency must 
promptly schedule a fair hearing, if requested.
    Lastly, Summer EBT agencies must also comply with minimum 
information requirements for applicants and recipients by informing 
them of their Program rights and responsibilities. This can be 
accomplished through whatever means the Summer EBT agencies deem 
appropriate. All Program informational material must be available in 
languages other than English, as necessary, including the USDA 
nondiscrimination statement, and should be provided in alternate 
formats for individuals with disabilities, as practicable.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking establishes 7 CFR 292.12 which 
outlines the Summer EBT agency's responsibilities for enrolling 
eligible children, maintaining an enrollment database, certification, 
applications, verification, notification to households, and appeal 
rights for households denied benefits.

Subpart D--Issuance and Use of Program Benefits

    In this subpart, USDA addresses issuance of Summer EBT benefits by 
Summer EBT agencies and the use of Program benefits by Program 
participants. In developing requirements for the issuance and use of 
Summer EBT benefits, USDA's overall objective is to leverage existing 
systems and processes, to the greatest extent possible, in order to 
streamline implementation for Summer EBT agencies and take advantage of 
proven implementation strategies. However, Summer EBT is different from 
SNAP, WIC, and school meal programs, and requires unique approaches to 
implementation, as described below. Sections that specifically apply to 
ITOs or do not apply to ITOs are so indicated.
i. General Standards
    Consistent with section 13A(b)(4)(A), this IFR establishes that 
Summer EBT benefits may only be issued for use during the summer 
months, when school is not in session. Summer EBT agencies must receive 
approval from USDA for any alternative plans for the periods during 
which Summer EBT benefits may be issued and used by children who are 
attending a school operating on a continuous school calendar. Summer 
EBT agencies must include their plans to serve schools operating on a 
continuous calendar as part of their POM. Timeliness of benefit 
issuance is addressed in more detail in Sec.  292.15(c)(1)(i) of this 
rulemaking.
    Accordingly, this program's standards for the timing of benefit 
issuance are codified at 7 CFR 292.15(a) through (c).
1. Benefit Issuance
    Summer EBT is a seasonal program that is designed to provide 
benefits to eligible children during a specific window of time 
annually. In order to meet the nutritional needs of children when they 
are out of school, Summer EBT agencies must be able to provide benefits 
prior to the summer operational period. If a State or ITO chooses to 
provide all benefits for the summer in a single issuance, the benefits 
must be available for households to spend before the first day of the 
summer operational period; when a State or ITO opts for multiple 
benefit issuances (e.g., monthly), the first issuance must occur before 
the start of the summer operational period. More information on benefit 
issuance schedules is included in the benefit amount section of this 
preamble. This is different from P-EBT, where benefits were issued 
retroactively at the end of eligible periods. The Summer EBT 
authorizing statute is a part of USDA's permanent operating authority, 
and USDA and Summer EBT agencies have the opportunity to build this 
Program from the ground up, allowing time to establish systems and 
processes that will support timely issuance of summer benefits to 
children annually. Therefore, USDA expects that Summer EBT agencies 
will be able to implement Summer EBT timely and with integrity, 
delivering benefits to children before the first day of the summer 
operational period so that benefits are available to spend during the 
summer months when the recipients are not in school and are unable to 
access school meals. However, if a child's Summer EBT application is 
selected for verification, that child may not be issued benefits until 
after verification is complete and eligibility is confirmed.
    The Summer EBT agency must establish the date on which benefits 
will be issued to households within the State or ITO and inform 
households of this date. Recognizing that students may face food 
insecurity as soon as school lets out, benefits must be issued and 
available for participants to spend at least seven calendar days and 
not more than 14 calendar days before the start of the summer 
operational period. In other words, Summer EBT agencies should issue 
and activate cards so benefits are available to spend at least one week 
before the start of the summer operational period, allowing households 
sufficient time to purchase food for their children so it will be 
available to eat on the first day of the summer operational period. 
Accordingly, this rulemaking includes a requirement that benefits be

[[Page 90267]]

issued before the start of the summer operational period. If the Summer 
EBT agency issues benefits after the summer operational period, a 
corrective action plan outlining the reasons benefits were not issued 
in a timely manner and steps the Summer EBT agency will take to ensure 
timely issuance in the future will need to be submitted to FNS.
    USDA understands that some participants will be difficult to reach 
for a variety of reasons including, but not limited to, outdated 
contact information, mail to the household is returned as 
undeliverable, or changes in the child's custody during the summer 
operational period. Summer EBT agencies should plan their issuance 
activities to allow enough time to resolved difficult cases and issue 
benefits to these children timely, to the maximum extent practicable, 
and work to resolve outstanding cases and issue participant benefits as 
expeditiously as possible. If the Summer EBT agency issues benefits 
after the summer operational period, the Summer EBT agency must submit 
to FNS a corrective action plan outlining the reasons benefits were not 
issued in a timely manner, and steps the Summer EBT agency will take to 
ensure timely issuance in the future. However, consistent with Sec.  
292.7(a) households have until the last day of the summer operational 
period to apply for benefits. The Summer EBT agency must process 
applications and issue benefits within 15 operational days of receipt 
of the application, as detailed in Sec.  292.12(f)(1). Therefore, 
Summer EBT agencies are not subject to corrective actions for benefits 
issued after the end of the summer operational period but within the 15 
day window in these instances.
    For eligible children who apply too late to be included in the 
Summer EBT agency's initial benefit issuance, the agency must issue 
benefits as quickly as possible but not later than 15 operational days 
after a complete application is received by the Summer EBT agency so 
that recipients have the opportunity to use their benefits to purchase 
food in the summer. This means EBT cards and PINs, if applicable, must 
be placed in the mail before the end of the 15th operational day. USDA 
recognizes that this is a shorter timeline than the 30 day issuance 
requirement in SNAP; however, Summer EBT benefits have a shorter period 
during which they can be spent, and Summer EBT applications do not 
require income verification before issuance which means they can be 
processed faster than SNAP applications. USDA will work with Summer EBT 
agencies to develop and implement systems and processes that will 
reliably deliver benefits timely.
    Summer EBT agencies are responsible for assisting children who do 
not live in a permanent dwelling or a fixed mailing address so they may 
obtain the Summer EBT benefits. This can be accomplished by assisting 
such households in finding an authorized representative who can act on 
their behalf, or through other appropriate means. Vulnerable 
populations such as these may need benefits quickly to meet an acute 
need. These standards require the administering agency to identify 
eligible households and make benefits available.
    Use of EBT cards is the industry standard for SNAP and WIC, and 
USDA expects that Summer EBT agencies will issue Program benefits on 
EBT cards in a similar manner to SNAP or WIC. However, section 
13A(b)(2)(B) allows benefits to be issued through another electronic 
means, as determined by the Secretary. In the event that a Summer EBT 
agency wants to adopt a new method of Summer EBT payment, such as 
payment with a mobile phone, USDA will work with the Summer EBT agency 
to determine whether and how this can best be executed while still 
meeting other program requirements. Some Territories operating the 
Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP), including American Samoa and the 
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, do not currently issue 
program benefits electronically. For these agencies, Summer EBT 
benefits may be issued in the same manner as NAP benefits.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking codified requirements for Summer EBT 
benefit issuance at 7 CFR 292.15(c).
2. Dual Participation
    Dual participation in Summer EBT in the same summer operational 
period is not allowed. This means that, in each summer, children may 
not receive multiple benefit allotments from the same State or ITO-
administered program, and children may not receive benefits from more 
than one State or ITO-administered program each summer. For example, a 
child who moves in the spring may not receive a benefit from the State 
they left and from the State to which they moved. (Note: as stated 
above in section iv.3. (Applications), SNAP benefits are interoperable, 
which means they can be used in any SNAP-authorized retailer in the 
United States, regardless of where they were issued. Therefore, 
households that move can use the benefits issued by their previous 
State of residence in the State to which they moved.) Likewise, a child 
living within an ITO Summer EBT agency's service area (as described in 
Sec.  292.9) may not receive benefits from the ITO-administered program 
and a State-administered program that operates in a proximate 
geographic area, nor may they receive benefits from two ITO-
administered programs. (Note: also stated above, benefits issued by 
ITO-administered programs are not interoperable. FNS will work with 
ITOs to determine the best way to convey eligibility and use of 
benefits for children enrolled in an ITO program who move during the 
summer.) That same child also may not receive duplicative Summer EBT 
benefits from the same source, i.e., multiple Summer EBT benefit 
allotments from a State Summer EBT agency which total in excess of $40 
per month for that child, as adjusted annually. Households engaged in 
dual participation may be subject to a claim by the Summer EBT agency 
as described in 292.27.
    State and ITO Summer EBT agencies must work together to prevent 
dual participation, particularly in border areas and around ITO service 
areas, and must establish detection and prevention procedures in their 
POMs. Summer EBT agencies could choose to adapt systems already in 
place for their SNAP or WIC program, or propose an alternative 
approach. USDA seeks comment on best practices for collaboration across 
States and ITOs to detect and prevent dual participation.
    Accordingly, 7 CFR 292.15(d) promulgates regulations on 
requirements for prevention of dual participation in the Summer EBT 
Program.
3. Benefit Amount
    As established in the NSLA, the monthly value of the Summer EBT 
benefit will be $40 in 2024, and will be adjusted annually starting in 
2025 to reflect changes to the Thrifty Food Plan, which is a plan 
developed by USDA to estimate the cost of a low-cost, healthy diet.\14\ 
The statute defines a benefit rate per month, as opposed to a daily or 
weekly rate, and allows States and ITOs to streamline program 
administration by establishing a single summer operational period. 
Therefore, Summer EBT agencies may not prorate benefits for partial 
months and must issue the full summer benefit to each eligible child. 
In general, summer break spans all or part of three months, with the 
May to September period being the most common months of summer break. 
Accordingly, USDA considers the summer operational period to constitute 
three months, meaning that Summer

[[Page 90268]]

EBT agencies must issue a full three months of benefits, even if the 
benefit issuance does not align with calendar months. In summer 2024, 
the benefits level is $40 per child per month and so each participating 
child will receive a $120 benefit, issued at the intervals described 
the Summer EBT agency's POM. Children who are certified as eligible for 
the Program during the summer must be issued the full summer benefit as 
well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ https://www.fns.usda.gov/taxonomy/term/415.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with other USDA programs, the Agency will publish a 
notice in January of each year in the Federal Register to announce the 
monthly benefit level for that year. This notice will also include 
details on how the benefit was calculated. Annual benefit adjustments 
will be consistent across programs operated by States and ITOs. Due to 
a higher cost of living in areas outside the contiguous United States, 
the statute allows USDA to adjust the monthly benefit for Alaska, 
Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands of the 
United States, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. 
Rates for these areas will also be included in an annual Federal 
Register notice.
    Summer EBT agencies have the flexibility to establish an issuance 
schedule, which does not need to align with the start of calendar 
months, and may include a single benefit issuance before the start of 
the summer operational period, or periodic issuances during the Summer. 
Benefits provided as a single issuance must be issued prior to the 
start of the summer operational period. If multiple issuances are 
provided, the first issuance must occur before the start of the summer 
operational period. Summer EBT agencies may also stagger throughout the 
month. Staggering means that a State is issuing benefits to eligible 
households on multiple days within a given month. In this case, a 
staggered issuance means that not every household in the State gets 
receives their benefit on the exact same day, which can help State 
agencies administer the program. Pro-rated benefits, which are 
prohibited under this rulemaking, is where participants would only 
receive a part of their benefits. Once established, the Summer EBT 
agency must inform households of the first day they will be able to 
access benefits and the schedule for expunging benefits. USDA urges 
Summer EBT agencies to consider the needs of eligible households and 
their benefit usage patterns when establishing an issuance schedule. 
Regardless of the issuance schedule used, the Summer EBT agency must 
adhere to the reporting requirements and benefit issuance requirements 
established in this rulemaking. These standards are designed to be 
consistent with SNAP regulations at Sec.  274.2(a) and (b), except 
that, instead of the 30-day standard described in Sec.  274.2, Summer 
EBT agencies must adhere to the 15-day issuance standard described 
above.
    Accordingly, this program's requirements for related to the value 
of benefits that may be issued and the manner of issuance are 
promulgated in 7 CFR 292.15(e)(f).
4. Participant Support
    Clear and consistent communication with the public will be central 
to successful implementation of Summer EBT in a State or ITO. Summer 
EBT is a new program, which means stakeholders at all levels need 
information that clearly explains what the Program is, who is eligible, 
and how benefits can be accessed and redeemed. Because P-EBT similarly 
provided EBT benefits to children who lost access to free or reduced 
price school meals, USDA anticipates that some eligible households and 
stakeholders will be confused about the difference between Summer EBT 
and P-EBT. Summer EBT agencies will need to provide information to 
clarify differences between Summer EBT and P-EBT. A key difference is 
that, in P-EBT, all children attending special provision schools, where 
every student is served meals at no charge, were eligible to receive 
the P-EBT benefit. However, Summer EBT is only available to children at 
special provision schools who have been determined to be income 
eligible for free or reduced price meals through existing 
administrative data or a Summer EBT application, as required by the 
statute. Communications with households of children attending special 
provision schools will need to clearly explain that, unlike P-EBT, 
households must submit a Summer EBT application if their child(ren) 
cannot be identified as eligible through streamlined certification, and 
that children attending special provision schools who received P-EBT 
are not eligible to receive Summer EBT if they are not determined to be 
income eligible. Similarly, Summer EBT is a program for school-age 
children while the statute authorizing P-EBT explicitly extended 
eligibility to children from birth to age 6 who were members of SNAP 
households whose covered child care facility was closed or operating 
with reduced hours or attendance. Families will need to know that their 
children are only eligible for Summer EBT if they are income eligible 
and attend an NSLP or SBP-participating school or are school-age and 
identified through existing administrative data.
    In addition, Summer EBT benefits will be issued for the summer 
operational period while P-EBT also included the school year. Families 
of eligible children will need materials that explain when the benefit 
will be made available and the period of time, they have to use their 
benefits before the benefits are no longer available to spend.
    Summer EBT agencies must provide written materials to each 
household prior to Summer EBT issuance and as needed during ongoing 
operation of the Summer EBT program. At a minimum, the household 
materials must provide information including, but not limited to: where 
benefits can be used, what foods are eligible for purchase, unallowable 
uses of benefits, and penalties for misuse, use of security Personal 
Identification Numbers (PINs), how families may access customer service 
supports during non-business hours, the eligibility criteria for 
benefits, and disclosure information regarding adjustments and a 
household's rights to notice, fair hearings, and provisional credits. 
The disclosure must also state where and how to dispute an adjustment 
and request a fair hearing. All materials must include the USDA 
statement of non-discrimination and be prepared at an educational 
reading level suitable for participant households. These standards are 
a minimum, and UDSA highly encourages Summer EBT agencies to maintain 
more frequent contact with eligible households to ensure they have the 
information they need to access program benefits. Examples include 
providing information through the schools before the end of the school 
year, robo-calls and texts to families to remind them that they have 
benefits available to spend, and social media ads. Summer EBT agencies 
should consider how they can incorporate outreach throughout the summer 
period in a manner that is inclusive of individuals with disabilities 
or limited English proficiency, and people who are unhoused, or 
generally are not well connected with community services or media.
    This subsection also addresses requirements for EBT cards and PINs, 
adjustments to posted benefits, and providing replacement EBT cards or 
PINs. To ease program implementation, these requirements largely mirror 
SNAP and WIC regulations on these issues.
    In the event benefits are erroneously posted or adjustments are 
needed to an account to correct an auditable, out-of-balance settlement 
condition that occurs during the redemption process as a

[[Page 90269]]

result of a system error, the Summer EBT agency may adjust benefits 
posted to household accounts. The Summer EBT agency must also ensure a 
duplicate account is not established which would permit households to 
access more than one account in the system.
    The Summer EBT agency must implement a reporting system which is 
continually operative. Once a household reports their EBT card has been 
lost or stolen, the Summer EBT agency must assume liability for 
benefits subsequently drawn from the account and replace any lost or 
stolen benefits to the household. An immediate hold must be placed on 
Summer EBT accounts at the time notice is received from a household 
regarding the need for card or PIN replacement in order to limit agency 
liability in the event the card is used for additional purchases after 
a card or PIN replacement request is received. The Summer EBT agency or 
its agent must maintain a record showing the date and time of all 
reports by households of a lost or stolen card. Finally, the Summer EBT 
agency must make replacement EBT benefits available to households when 
the household reports food purchased with Summer EBT benefits was 
destroyed in a household misfortune or disaster. FNS is interested in 
comments on the challenges associated with providing replacement Summer 
EBT benefits or not providing replacement Summer EBT benefits.
    Accordingly, this program's requirements for participant support 
are codified at 7 CFR 292.15(g).
5. Expungement
    Summer EBT benefits are intended to be available for households to 
spend when children are not receiving school meals during the summer. 
Accordingly, the NSLA places limits on how long benefits may remain 
available for households to spend after the summer operational period 
ends. As discussed in subpart B, Summer EBT agencies have the 
discretion to establish a summer operational period that generally 
reflects the start and end dates of local summer vacations. In order to 
allow a reasonable amount of time after the end of the summer 
operational period for households to finish spending their benefits, 
Summer EBT benefits must be expunged four months after issuance, which, 
for the purpose of Summer EBT, will be 122 calendar days. Once 
expunged, benefits may not be reinstated. This approach may be new for 
ITO Summer EBT agencies as WIC benefits are not available to spend 
beyond the month for which they were issued. In the SEBTC demonstration 
projects, a few grantees that were WIC-administering agencies and used 
WIC infrastructure issued benefits that were available to spend 
throughout the entire summer period and they found that this increased 
benefit redemption and was appealing to participating households. 
Summer EBT agencies must also provide notice to the household that 
benefits in their EBT account are approaching expungement not less than 
30 days before benefit expungement is scheduled to begin. This approach 
is consistent with statutory limits on benefit availability included in 
the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, while also allowing flexibility for 
families to use their benefits. In the SEBTC demonstrations, grantees 
determined that frequent contact with households throughout the summer 
was a best practice for providing timely technical assistance and 
encouraging benefit use.
    Summer EBT agencies must establish procedures to adjust Summer EBT 
benefits that have already been posted to an EBT account prior to the 
household accessing the account funds, or to remove benefits from 
inactive accounts for expungement. Whenever benefits are expunged, the 
Summer EBT agency must document the date and amount of the benefits in 
the household case file and issuance reports must reflect the 
adjustment to the Summer EBT agency issuance totals to comply with 
reporting requirements in 7 CFR 292.23.
    Some State Summer EBT agencies may choose to load Summer EBT 
benefits on existing SNAP cards for households that participate in both 
programs. Because Summer EBT benefits have a shorter expungement period 
than SNAP benefits, Summer EBT agencies that load Summer EBT benefits 
onto existing SNAP accounts must ensure Summer EBT benefits are drawn 
down prior to SNAP benefits so they are used prior to expungement 
period.
    Accordingly, this program's benefit expungement requirements are 
codified at 7 CFR 292.15(h) and (i).
ii. Issuance and Adjustment Requirements Specific to States That 
Administer SNAP
    This section details benefit issuance requirements that are 
specific to all States that operate SNAP. This section does not apply 
to Territories that administer the Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP). 
As previously stated, USDA's aim in promulgating these regulations is 
to streamline operations and reduce burden to the greatest extent 
possible by adopting systems and processes that Summer EBT agencies are 
already accustomed to using. To that end, this rulemaking establishes a 
framework that includes certain SNAP requirements for effective and 
responsible administration of the Summer EBT Program by State Summer 
EBT agencies.
    These requirements are:
    <bullet> Basic issuance requirements including the establishment of 
issuance and accountability systems consistent with Sec.  274.1.
    <bullet> Requirements and restrictions regarding general SNAP terms 
and conditions consistent with Sec.  272.1.
    <bullet> Automation and computerization of State Summer EBT 
operations and data management systems for obtaining, maintaining, 
utilizing and transmitting information concerning Summer EBT consistent 
with Sec.  292.16(c).
    <bullet> Requirements regarding internal controls consistent with 
Sec.  272.4(c)(1), court suit reporting consistent with Sec.  272.4(d), 
Summer EBT agency monitoring of duplication consistent with Sec.  
272.4(e), and hours of operations consistent with Sec.  272.4(f).
    <bullet> Program informational activities that convey information 
about the Program, including household rights and responsibilities, 
through means such as publications, telephone hotlines, and face-to-
face contacts, consistent with t Sec.  272.5(b).
    <bullet> Procedures for program administration in Alaska. To 
achieve the efficient and effective administration of SNAP in rural 
areas of Alaska, USDA has determined that it is necessary to develop 
additional regulations which are specifically designed to accommodate 
the unique demographic and climatic characteristics which exist in 
these rural areas. USDA is applying the regulations established at 
Sec.  272.7 for SNAP implementation in Alaska to Summer EBT 
implementation in Alaska.
    <bullet> Procedures for household disqualification consistent with 
273.16 .
    <bullet> Requirements that Summer EBT benefits may only be used to 
purchase eligible foods from retail food stores approved for 
participation in SNAP.
    <bullet> Requirement that SNAP retailers to also accept Summer EBT 
benefits, subject to the participation requirements for SNAP.
    <bullet> Requirement that the State Summer EBT agency to maintain 
issuance, inventory, reconciliation, and other accountability records 
consistent with Sec.  274.5.
    <bullet> Requirements for standards regarding benefit redemption by 
eligible households consistent with Sec.  274.7.
    <bullet> State Summer EBT agency assurance that its EBT system is 
capable

[[Page 90270]]

of performing necessary functional requirements, including 
interoperability and portability requirements, consistent with the 
regulations at Sec.  274.8.
    <bullet> State Summer EBT agencies must account for all issuance 
through a reconciliation process as described by USDA.
    Accordingly, this subsection codifies issuance and adjustment 
requirements for State Summer EBT agencies at 7 CFR 292.16.
iii. Retailer Integrity Requirements Specific to States, Including 
Territories That Administer SNAP
    As required by section 13A of the NSLA, Summer EBT benefits are 
subject to certain integrity requirements found in the Food and 
Nutrition Act of 2008. Specifically, Summer EBT agencies must comply 
with section 12, Civil penalties and disqualification of retail food 
stores and wholesale food concerns; section 14, Administrative and 
judicial review; and section 15 Violations and enforcement (7 U.S.C. 
2021, 2023, 2024). As these requirements were established in the Food 
and Nutrition Act for SNAP, USDA has already promulgated regulations 
that implement each requirement. These SNAP regulations were informed 
by real-world experience and were developed through notice and comment 
rulemaking, so they have the benefit of practical knowledge and public 
input. USDA has determined that many aspects of the SNAP regulations 
implementing sections 12, 14, and 15 of the Food and Nutrition Act are 
also appropriate for Summer EBT, and adopting these same requirements 
is preferable to developing different requirements for Summer EBT. This 
approach is also the least burdensome for administering agencies 
because it does not require agencies to develop new implementation 
approaches to meeting the requirements in sections 12, 14, and 15 of 
the Food and Nutrition Act for Summer EBT.
    Specifically, this rulemaking applies the following SNAP 
requirements to the Summer EBT Program:
    <bullet> Participation of retail food stores and wholesale food 
concerns, and redemption of
    <bullet> Summer EBT benefits requirements at Sec. Sec.  278.2, 
278.3, and 278.4.
    <bullet> Firm eligibility standards found in parts 271, 278, and 
279.
    <bullet> Penalties for firms that commit certain violations 
described in part 278.
    <bullet> Claims standards for retail food stores and wholesale food 
concerns described at Sec.  278.7.
    <bullet> Administrative and Judicial review. Firms aggrieved by 
administrative action under sections 271, 278, and 279 may request 
administrative review of the administrative action with USDA in 
accordance with part 279, subpart A, of this chapter. Firms aggrieved 
by the determination of such an administrative review may seek judicial 
review of the determination under 5 U.S.C. 702 through 706.
    Accordingly, this section codifies retailer integrity requirements 
for State, including territories that administer SNAP, in 7 CFR 292.17.
iv. Requirements Specific to States That Administer Nutrition 
Assistance Programs (NAP)
    In lieu of SNAP, section 19 of the Food and Nutrition Grant [42 
U.S.C. 2028] authorizes Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) block grants 
for food assistance to low-income households in the U.S. Territories of 
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and American Samoa. Pursuant to 
authority at 48 U.S.C. 1469d, FNS has also extended a NAP grant in lieu 
of SNAP to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
    This rulemaking codifies section 13A(b)(1)(A) of the NSLA, which 
requires that Summer EBT benefits issued by a Territory administering 
NAP may only be used by the eligible household to purchase NAP-eligible 
foods from retail food stores that have been approved for participation 
in NAP. In addition, States that administer NAP shall establish 
issuance and accountability systems which ensure that only certified 
eligible households receive Summer EBT benefits.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking codified requirements for States that 
administer NAP at 7 CFR 292.18.
v. Requirements Specific to ITO Summer EBT Agencies
    This section of the IFR provides ITO-specific responsibilities 
related to the issuance of Summer EBT program benefits, in addition to 
the general standards set forth in this subsection. The ITO Summer EBT 
agency must ensure that Summer EBT program benefits are used by the 
eligible household that receives such benefits to transact for 
supplemental foods from Summer EBT-enrolled vendors that have been 
approved for participation in the WIC Program.
    ITO Summer EBT agency procedures and operations related to basic 
issuance requirements, reconciliation, benefit redemption, and 
functional and technical EBT system requirements, should be consistent 
with WIC regulations at 7 CFR part 246.12 as applicable to the benefit 
delivery model used, to the extent such requirements do not conflict 
with the requirements set forth for ITO Summer EBT agencies in this 
part.
    The Department learned from participating ITOs through the Summer 
EBT demonstration projects the importance of providing flexibility in 
how benefits may be offered to participants. To promote maximum 
flexibility, ITO Summer EBT agencies may choose to pursue a cash-value 
benefit (CVB) model, a food package model, a combination of the two, or 
an alternate model. The ITO Summer EBT agency must use the same benefit 
model for all participants throughout its service area, in accordance 
with its POM.
    For ITOs using solely a CVB model, the ITO Summer EBT agency must 
issue a benefit level equal to the amount set forth in 7 CFR 292.15(e). 
For 2024, the monthly benefit level will equal $40, and USDA will 
adjust the benefit level amount in subsequent years pursuant to 
statutory and regulatory requirements. For ITOs choosing to use a food 
package model, a combination CVB/food package model, or alternate 
model, the benefit level may not exceed that set forth in 7 CFR 
292.15(e). The ITO Summer EBT agency is not required to restrict CVB to 
the purchase of fruits and vegetables and may expand their Summer EBT-
eligible foods to include other items that meet the definition of a 
supplemental food as described below. USDA is open to innovative 
benefit issuance solutions, and will work with ITO Summer EBT agencies 
to identify which model best fits the unique needs of each community.
    In addition, pursuant to statute, this section requires ITO Summer 
EBT agencies to provide supplemental foods that: contain nutrients 
determined by nutritional research to be lacking in the diets of 
children and promote the health of the population served by the 
program, as indicated by relevant nutrition science, public health 
concerns, and cultural eating patterns or allow for different cultural 
eating patterns than foods described in such subparagraph. Supplemental 
food that can be purchased with WIC benefits have similar nutritional 
requirements; thus, an ITO Summer EBT agency may consider supplemental 
foods authorized in its WIC Program to meet the requirements to be a 
Summer EBT-authorized product. However, infant formula and infant foods 
are excluded from use in Summer EBT program, consistent with the 
statutory definition of supplemental food in section 13(A)(h)(4) of the 
NSLA and Summer EBT program regulations at 7 CFR

[[Page 90271]]

292.19 even if they are approved for the ITO's WIC program. ITO Summer 
EBT agencies may tailor the benefit to specific student age groups as 
long as the monthly benefit level equals that set forth in 7 CFR 292.15 
9(e).
    Further, ITO Summer EBT agencies must ensure that vendors charge 
prices for eligible food items which are reasonable for the area(s) 
served and are at the current price or less than the current price 
charged to other customers. Vendors may not charge Summer EBT 
participants more for an item than the price in the retail environment 
for all other customers. This section also requires ITO Summer EBT 
agencies to ensure vendor integrity, in accordance with existing WIC 
regulations. However, ITO Summer EBT agencies may also set forth an 
alternate system to ensure effective vendor management and vendor 
integrity.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking codifies requirements specific to ITO 
Summer EBT agencies at 7 CFR 292.19.

Subpart E--General Administrative Requirements

i. Payments to Summer EBT Agencies and Use of Administrative Program 
Funds
    The language in this section applies to States, territories, and 
ITOs unless otherwise specified.
1. Benefit Funds
    Summer EBT is a permanent program that will provide benefits to 
children each summer. This permanence and stability will afford Summer 
EBT agencies the opportunity to plan, prepare, and invest in program 
infrastructure to deliver Summer EBT benefits in a manner that is 
efficient, effective, and supports high levels of program integrity.
    Establishing systems to keep Summer EBT benefits fully separate 
from other benefit streams is critical to the integrity of the Program. 
For P-EBT, USDA permitted States to issue food benefits through the 
Account Management Agent (AMA), using the same account through which 
the State's SNAP benefits are issued. As a result, P-EBT and SNAP 
benefits are generally indistinguishable throughout the issuance and 
redemption process. This has made it very challenging for USDA to 
separately track SNAP and P-EBT funds and undermines USDA's oversight 
and integrity efforts. Despite these significant drawbacks, States were 
permitted to use this approach for P-EBT so that the Program could be 
implemented quickly during a national emergency, delivering timely 
benefits to millions of children who had suddenly lost access to school 
meals because of the COVID-19 pandemic. USDA has identified a better 
approach to providing Summer EBT benefit funds that Summer EBT agencies 
will have the time and stability to implement.
    To help Summer EBT agencies meet the statutory integrity 
requirements discussed in subpart D of this rule, USDA will obligate 
100 percent of Summer EBT benefit funds to Summer EBT agencies as a 
grant. Summer EBT agencies, in partnership with their EBT processors, 
will need to manage the Summer EBT benefit funds in a manner similar to 
WIC, State-funded food assistance programs, and cash programs. At the 
point of redemption, the Summer EBT agency will draw funds from the 
USDA-provided Summer EBT benefit grant through the associated Automated 
Standard Application for Payments (ASAP) account. This account will be 
accessed and managed by the Summer EBT agency. This approach will 
enable Summer EBT agencies to more effectively track Summer EBT 
benefits separately from SNAP benefits, WIC benefits, or other benefit 
types, allowing them to apply the same oversight, restrictions and 
requirements as SNAP and WIC benefits. ITOs will be familiar with this 
process as it is the method used to fund WIC. Territories that 
administer NAP will issue Summer EBT benefits in the same manner they 
issue NAP benefits.
2. State Administrative Funds
    USDA is authorized to pay each Summer EBT agency an amount equal to 
50 percent of the administrative expenses incurred by the Summer EBT 
agency in operating the program under this section, including the 
administrative expenses of LEAs and other agencies in each State or ITO 
relating to the operation of their Summer EBT Program. This means that 
Summer EBT agencies will need to cover the balance of their 
administrative costs, i.e., their ``match,'' with non-Federal funds. As 
previously discussed, Summer EBT agencies must include an 
administrative budget as part of the annual POM. In States or ITOs 
operating Summer EBT through more than one agency, each Summer EBT 
agency may include separate administrative funding requests in their 
POM for the administrative convenience of receiving funds without the 
need to transfer money between Summer EBT agencies. However, the 
coordinating Summer EBT agency and partnering Summer EBT agency 
requests must be coordinated to ensure the requests are consistent with 
overall program operations and the required cost allocations are 
maintained.
    The Child Nutrition Programs, SNAP, and WIC are distinct programs 
from Summer EBT. Therefore, States and ITOs, generally may not use 
Federal Child Nutrition, SNAP, or WIC administrative funds in the 
administration of Summer EBT. If a Summer EBT agency conducts 
activities that will benefit the administration of more than one 
Federal program, the agency must appropriately allocate administrative 
costs to each affected program. In addition, the Summer EBT agency may 
generally not use other Federal program funds as part of their Summer 
EBT match.
    The Summer EBT agency may use the following resources to pay their 
50% share of administrative funding:

    <bullet> project costs financed with cash contributed or donated to 
the Summer EBT, and
    <bullet> project costs represented by services and real or personal 
property donated to the Summer EBT agency (i.e., in kind 
contributions).
    Project costs may be reported on either a cash or accrual basis by 
the Summer EBT agency.
    Cash or in-kind contributions, as described above, are generally 
allowable if they are verifiable, allowable, necessary, in the agency's 
approved budget, and not related to any other Federal program costs 
unless specifically provided in regulations. The value of services 
rendered by volunteers is not an allowable in-kind contribution.
    USDA received feedback from State agencies and ITOs that there are 
barriers and challenges to securing Summer EBT funding, designing and 
planning the program, and coordinating across agencies in time to 
implement benefit issuance in summer 2024. To address this, States and 
ITOs may receive administrative funding for a ``planning year'' if 
needed in 2024. States and ITOs will still be required to provide the 
50% State or ITO match and submit and interim POM, but Summer EBT 
agencies will not be required to issue benefits in 2024. While this 
option is in place, USDA highly encourages States in a position to 
issue benefits in 2024 to do so. States and ITOs taking advantage of 
this option must have a plan to issue benefits by summer 2025 in order 
to receive administrative funding in 2024.
    USDA will recover any administrative funds which are in excess of 
obligations reported at the end of each fiscal year through an 
adjustment in the Summer EBT agency's Letter of Credit. Each Summer EBT 
agency must maintain Program records to support

[[Page 90272]]

administrative costs and retain these records for a period of 3 years, 
or as otherwise specified.
    Accordingly, payments to Summer EBT agencies and use of 
administrative program funds requirements are codified at 7 CFR 292.20.
ii. Methods of Payment
    Summer EBT agencies will receive benefit funds and administrative 
funds through separate letters of credit (LOC). Each Summer EBT agency 
that wants to receive administrative funds directly from USDA will do 
so through its own LOC. If a State or ITO requests funds through only 
one LOC, the Summer EBT agency that is responsible for that LOC will 
also be responsible for distributing administrative funds across 
partnering agencies, as appropriate. The Summer EBT agency that 
administers the EBT benefit issuance will receive the benefit grant.
    The LOC is the document by which an official of FNS authorizes a 
Summer EBT agency to draw funds from the United States Treasury. Summer 
EBT agencies will request payment(s) by submitting a request to the 
appropriate Treasury Regional Disbursing Office with a copy to FNS. If 
a Summer EBT agency cannot meet the requirements for the LOC method of 
payment, it will be provided funds by Treasury check in accordance with 
Treasury requirements.
    Accordingly, methods of payment are codified at 7 CFR 292.20.
iii. Standards for Financial Management Systems
    Summer EBT agencies are subject to the same standards for financial 
management systems as agencies administering other USDA programs. These 
standards also apply to all Summer EBT agencies and their respective 
subagencies or contractors.
    Financial management systems for a Summer EBT agency's program 
funds must be able to provide accurate, current, and complete financial 
records, identify Federal awards received and expended and the Federal 
programs under which they were received, and include an audit trail to 
support any costs claimed for reimbursement. These systems must also be 
able to provide effective controls and accountability to safeguard 
Federal funds and minimize the time it takes for the agency to disburse 
funds for program costs. In addition, system procedures are needed to 
determine the reasonableness, allowability, and allocability of costs.
    Periodic audits of Summer EBT agency financial management systems, 
consistent with 2 CFR part 200, subpart F, are required. The financial 
systems must support agency resolution of audit findings, 
recommendations, and follow up on corrective or preventive actions.
    Accordingly, standards for financial management systems are 
codified at 7 CFR 292.21.
iv. Performance Criteria
    This rulemaking establishes four performance criteria for Summer 
EBT in order to promote program access, a high standard of customer 
service, and program integrity. USDA adopted a similar approach with 
direct certification in 7 CFR 245.13. Performance benchmarks for direct 
certification are tied to a State's ability to directly certify each 
child who can be directly certified through SNAP in order to promote 
program accuracy, reduce paperwork for States and households, and 
increase eligible children's access to school meals. States that do not 
meet the NSLP direct certification benchmarks are required to submit a 
continuous improvement plan (CIP) which USDA supports with technical 
assistance during plan development and implementation. USDA data show 
that State direct certification rates are trending upward,\15\ a 
finding which suggests that enhanced data collection, matching, and 
technical assistance associated with these benchmarks have supported 
program improvement over time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, 
Office of Policy Support, Direct Certification in the National Lunch 
Program: State Implementation Progress, School Year 2015-2016 and 
School Year 2016-2017, by Dennis Ranalli, Joe Templin and Maggie 
Applebaum, Alexandria, VA: October 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The performance criteria for Summer EBT established in this rule 
making are directly linked to the effectiveness of the Program and must 
be monitored and documented by the Summer EBT agency. USDA does not 
expect that Summer EBT agencies will reach 100% on each of these 
benchmarks at the onset of the Program. Rather, the purpose of 
monitoring and documenting these criteria in the immediate term is to 
establish a reasonable baseline for each. If it is determined that 
these criteria are meaningful and can be accurately measured, USDA will 
consider adding numeric targets for each criterion to encourage 
continued Programmatic improvement. Similar to direct certification, if 
a target is not met, USDA would work with the Summer EBT agency to 
develop a continuous improvement plan (CIP) and provide technical 
assistance to help the Summer EBT agency achieve that target. USDA is 
interested in comments on the concept of having performance criteria, 
the benefits and challenges of linking numeric targets to a CIP, the 
value of each criteria as a meaningful and measurable assessment of 
performance, and if there are other metrics that are meaningful and 
measurable, such as the percent of benefits issued that are redeemed.
    USDA will provide guidance on how to evaluate and document each of 
these criteria:
    Performance Criteria 1--Percentage of children eligible for Summer 
EBT benefits who participated by using their benefits at least once.
    This metric measures the Summer EBT agency's ability to identify, 
enroll, issue benefits to the correct location, and provide customer 
support to all children eligible for the program.
    Performance Criteria 2--Percentage of Summer EBT benefits that are 
erroneously issued to children not eligible for Summer EBT, or 
erroneously not issued to children who are eligible.
    This metric measures the Summer EBT agency's ability to correctly 
identify which children are eligible (or ineligible) and to prevent 
improper payments.
    Performance Criteria 3--Percentage of children issued benefits who 
receive their first issuance before the start of the summer operational 
period.
    This metric measures the Summer EBT agency's ability to enroll 
eligible children timely, obtain correct addresses for households of 
eligible children, and issue EBT cards (or other benefit instruments) 
in advance of the last day of school so that benefits are available to 
spend immediately when school lets out. P-EBT benefits were not issued 
timely for a variety of reasons, and this benchmark is intended to aid 
USDA and States in identifying why lags occur and develop strategies to 
prevent late issuances.
    Performance Criteria 4--Percentage of eligible children who can be 
identified through streamlined certification who are enrolled without 
further application.
    This metric measures the effectiveness of the Summer EBT agency's 
systems and processes to enroll children using existing administrative 
data without additional burden on families.
    Accordingly, this IFR codified performance criteria at 7 CFR 
292.22.
v. Records and Reports
    Consistent with other USDA programs, Summer EBT agencies and LEAs 
must retain records for a period of 3 years after submission of the 
certification data for the fiscal year. If audit findings have not been 
resolved, the records must be retained beyond the

[[Page 90273]]

3-year period as long as required for the resolution of the issues 
raised by the audit. Records may be retained in their original form or 
electronic form.
    Accordingly, record retention and reporting requirements are 
codified at 7 CFR 292.23.
vi. Audits and Management Control Evaluations
1. Audits
    Summer EBT agencies must arrange for audits of their own operations 
in accordance with uniform administrative requirements, cost principle, 
and audit requirement for Federal awards. Agencies must also provide 
USDA's Office of the Inspector General with full opportunity to audit 
the Summer EBT agency and LEAs.
2. Management Control Evaluations
    Summer EBT agencies must provide USDA with full opportunity to 
conduct management control evaluations of all operations of the Summer 
EBT agency. The Summer EBT agency must make available its records, 
including records of the receipts and expenditures of funds, upon a 
reasonable request by USDA.
vii. Investigations
    In order to improve Program performance, Summer EBT agencies must 
promptly investigate complaints received or irregularities noted in 
connection with the operation of the Program and take appropriate 
action to correct any irregularities. The Summer EBT agency must 
maintain on file all evidence relating to such investigations and 
actions. The Summer EBT agency must also inform the appropriate FNSRO 
of any suspected fraud or criminal abuse in the Program which would 
result in a loss or misuse of Federal funds and USDA may make 
investigations at the request of the Summer EBT agency, or where it 
determines investigations are appropriate.
    Accordingly, this IFR codifies investigation procedures for Summer 
EBT at 7 CFR 292.25.
viii. Hearing Procedure for Families and Summer EBT Agencies
    Each Summer EBT agency must establish a hearing procedure allowing 
households to appeal decisions made with respect to a Summer EBT 
application they submitted and allowing Summer EBT agencies to 
challenge continued eligibly of a child. Because the process to 
establish eligibility for Summer EBT is rooted in the NSLP/SBP 
eligibility process, these requirements are largely the same as those 
included in NSLP/SBP regulations. As a result, a household's experience 
will be consistent if it requests a hearing in the NSLP, SBP, or Summer 
EBT. In order to provide for fair treatment of all parties involved in 
the hearing process, the regulations detail required hearing procedures 
including notices and written records, timeframes for action, the 
rights of participants to legal counsel and to present and view 
evidence, the right to refute any testimony or evidence, and 
requirements for hearing officials.
    Accordingly, hearing procedures are codified at 7 CFR 292.26.
ix. Claims
    Summer EBT agencies are responsible to ensure that program benefits 
are provided only to eligible children in the correct amount, and that 
no child receives duplicate benefits, in accordance with program 
regulations. USDA may hold Summer EBT agencies liable for erroneous 
payments and pursue claims against the State in the aggregate when 
merited, based on the nature of the error that gave rise to the 
erroneous payment, the size of the error, and whether such action would 
advance program purposes.
    In turn, Summer EBT agencies must develop a process to manage cases 
of erroneous issuances and pursue claims against a household, as 
appropriate. Summer EBT agencies have the discretion to determine when 
to pursue a claim when erroneous issuances are discovered based on cost 
effectiveness or the individual circumstances. Most children who 
receive Summer EBT benefits will be enrolled through streamlined 
certification with no action on the part of the household required. 
Therefore, a child enrolled through streamlined certification might 
unknowingly use benefits that were issued in error, including a 
situation where the child's household applies for duplicate benefits 
because they are not aware of their automatic enrollment. It may be a 
significant burden on low-income households to pay back benefits 
already spent, especially when they were unaware of the error and do 
not have sufficient funds on hand to pay the claim. To the maximum 
extent practicable, Summer EBT agencies should limit claims against 
households to situations where there is evidence that the household 
knowingly obtained benefits through fraudulent activities. To limit 
risk of unintentional use of erroneous benefits, Summer EBT agencies 
have the responsibility to communicate eligibility determinations to 
households and provide sufficient information for households to 
determine their eligibility status and the amount they should be 
issued. In addition, Summer EBT agencies may not reclaim Summer EBT 
benefits by reducing a household's SNAP or WIC benefit. Summer EBT 
agencies must also develop a process to allow households to submit a 
claim for benefits that were not issued or issued in the incorrect 
amount.
    To inform future rulemaking, USDA is interested in comments on 
Summer EBT claims including: the most common reasons for erroneous 
issuances, the frequency of erroneous issuances, how such issuances are 
detected, the feasibility of successfully pursuing a claim against a 
household, and the resources required to purse a claim.
    Accordingly, claims procedures are codified at 7 CFR 292.27.
x. Procurement Standards
1. General
    In general, Summer EBT is subject to Federal procurement 
requirements for Summer EBT agency and local agency costs paid with 
Federal funds, including costs associated with eligibility systems. 
Consistent with other USDA programs, such purchases must comply with 
Federal procurement requirements in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA 
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415.
    As discussed in 7 CFR 292.11, Summer EBT is subject to the Advance 
Planning Document (APD) process, which is a series of successive steps 
through which agencies administering USDA programs obtain Federal prior 
approval and financial participation in automation projects supporting 
USDA programs. This generally includes all SNAP and WIC eligibility 
system and EBT projects. APD procurement requirements take the place of 
standard procurement rules for costs associated with projects subject 
to the APD process. Therefore, any costs associated with EBT projects 
for a Summer EBT program will follow APD rules and will not follow 
standard procurement rules.
    Although the APD process usually applies to eligibility system 
projects, USDA is not requiring Summer EBT agencies that also operate 
Child Nutrition Programs to follow the APD process at this time. As 
detailed in 7 CFR 292.11, USDA has not historically used the APD 
process for CNP eligibility systems, which are the eligibility systems 
most likely to need changes to implement Summer EBT. The agency has 
determined that adding APD requirements for CNP agencies would take 
more time and planning than is available at this time, so they will

[[Page 90274]]

remain subject to standard procurement rules.
    Accordingly, procurement requirements are codified at 7 CFR 292.27.
2. Contractual Responsibilities
    The standards contained in this part, 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, 
and USDA implementing regulations at 2 CFR parts 400 and 415, as 
applicable, do not relieve any Summer EBT agency or local agency of any 
contractual responsibilities under its contracts. The Summer EBT agency 
or local agency is the responsible authority, without recourse to USDA, 
regarding the settlement and satisfaction of all contractual and 
administrative issues arising out of procurements entered into in 
connection with the Program. This includes, but is not limited to, 
source evaluation, protests, disputes, claims, or other matters of a 
contractual nature. Matters concerning violation of law are to be 
referred to the local, State, ITO, or Federal authority that has proper 
jurisdiction.
    Accordingly, contractual responsibilities are codified at 7 CFR 
292.27(c).
3. Procedures
    The Summer EBT agency may elect to follow either the State or ITO 
laws, policies and procedures as authorized by 2 CFR 200.317, or the 
procurement standards for other governmental grantees and all 
governmental subgrantees in accordance with 2 CFR 200.318 through 
200.326. Regardless of the option selected, Summer EBT agencies must 
ensure that all contracts include any clauses required by Federal 
statutes and executive orders and that the requirements in 2 CFR 
200.236 and 2 CFR part 200, appendix II, Contract Provisions for Non-
Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Award, are followed.
    Accordingly, additional procurement procedures are codified at 7 
CFR 292.27(d).
xi. Miscellaneous Administrative Provisions
1. Civil Rights
    In the operation of the Program, no child shall be denied benefits 
or be otherwise discriminated against because of race, color, national 
origin, age, sex, or disability. Summer EBT agencies and LEAs must 
comply with the requirements of: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 
1964; title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972; section 504 of the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Age Discrimination Act of 1975; 
Department of Agriculture regulations on nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts 
15, 15a, and 15b); and FNS Instruction 113-1.
2. Program Evaluations
    Summer EBT agencies, LEAs, schools, and contractors must cooperate 
in studies and evaluations conducted by or on behalf of the Department 
that are related to programs authorized under the NSLA and the Child 
Nutrition Act of 1966.
3. General Responsibilities
    The criminal penalties and provisions established in section 12(g) 
of the NSLA, (42 U.S.C. 1760(g)), state substantially: Whoever 
embezzles, willfully misapplies, steals, or obtains by fraud any funds, 
assets, or property that are the subject of a grant or other form of 
assistance under this Act or the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 
1771 et seq.), whether received directly or indirectly from the United 
States Department of Agriculture, or whoever receives, conceals, or 
retains such funds, assets, or property to personal use or gain, 
knowing such funds, assets, or property have been embezzled, willfully 
misapplied, stolen, or obtained by fraud must, if such funds, assets, 
or property are of the value of $100 or more, be fined not more than 
$25,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both, or, if such 
funds, assets, or property are of a value of less than $100, must be 
fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or 
both.
    Accordingly, this IFR codifies civil right requirements at 7 CFR 
292.28(a), requirements for cooperation with Program evaluations at 7 
CFR 292.28(b), and general responsibilities of Summer EBT agencies at 7 
CFR 292.28(c).
xii. Information Collection/Recordkeeping--OMB Assigned Control Numbers

F. Severability

    The statutory enhancement of the USDA summer meals programs for 
children through establishment of the Summer Electronic Benefits 
Transfer Program for Children providing States and covered Indian 
Tribal Organizations nutrition assistance through electronic benefit 
transfer or similar methods, which may be used to purchase food from 
approved retail stores is essential for ensuring that all children 
receive nutritious meals during the summer months when school is not in 
session. The benefits will be used to purchase food during the summer 
months. As directed by statute, USDA is establishing the Summer EBT 
program beginning in Summer 2024 through this rulemaking, in 
partnership with States and covered Indian Tribal Organizations which 
choose to participate. Based on the statutory requirement to establish 
the Summer EBT program beginning in 2024, USDA has determined that its 
authority to implement the regulation is well-supported in law as well 
as in practice, based on USDA's administration of demonstration 
projects and similar programs over the past decade. Accordingly, USDA 
has determined that this exercise of its statutory authority reflects 
sound policy and should be upheld in any legal challenge. However, if 
any portion of the rule is declared invalid, USDA intends the various 
aspects of this rule to be severable. For example, if a court were to 
find any provision unlawful, such as (1) student eligibility 
determination protocols, (2) the expungement timeframes, or (3) some 
other aspect of this rule, USDA intends that all other provisions in 
the rule will remain in effect so that States and covered Indian Tribal 
Organizations can implement the Summer EBT program beginning in 2024. 
USDA has concluded that it is in the interests of our Nation's children 
for electronic benefits to be provided to families so they may purchase 
food during the summer months when school is not in session. 
Furthermore, in the event any part or the entirety of the Summer EBT 
program established by this rulemaking were declared invalid, Summer 
EBT is severable and does not prevent the non-congregate rural option, 
discussed above, from proceeding since the non-congregate rural option 
and Summer EBT program function independently.

IV. Coordinated Services Plan

    The creation of the permanent Summer EBT Program, as well as the 
establishment of the Summer rural non-congregate meal service option, 
create together a fundamental shift in how summer nutrition can be 
provided to children across the country. As part of that fundamental 
shift, it is important to consider how these two Programs can 
complement one another, but also how other Federal, State, Tribal, and 
local programs can join efforts to increase children's access to food 
in the summer, as well as access to other important services.
    Therefore, beginning in 2025, each State will be required to submit 
to FNS (and update at least every three years thereafter) a single 
Coordinated Services Plan (CSP). Any significant changes must be 
updated on an annual basis. States must also notify the public of their 
CSP and make it readily available

[[Page 90275]]

on their website. The intent of the CSP is for each State to craft a 
coordinated approach to reaching children with various human services 
programs in the summertime, with a focus on summer nutrition. If more 
than one State or Summer EBT agency administers these Programs within a 
respective State, they must work together to develop and implement the 
CSP. Indian Trial Organizations that administer Summer EBT may create 
their own CSP to the maximum extent practicable. In addition, States 
are strongly encouraged to coordinate services across other 
governmental and non-governmental programs in partnership with 
community organizations that directly administer the program and/or 
support its operation (e.g., libraries that operate as sites and 
provide summer reading programs, community organizations that operate 
sites and provide funding or enrichment activities, etc.).
    In order to ensure that CSPs remain up to date, they will be 
required to be submitted annually when there are significant updates, 
or at least once every three years. For both the initial CSP submission 
as well as the subsequent significant annual and/or triennial updates, 
States must consult with FNS to receive technical assistance and 
recommendations of additional avenues to ensure access for eligible 
children.
    FNS plans to issue a CSP template following publication of this 
rule which will include a suggested format and examples of the kind of 
information to include in the Plans. FNS will provide technical 
assistance and share best practices to assist States and ITOs in 
drafting their Plans along with the release of the template in 2024.
    USDA seeks public comments on all aspects of the Coordinated 
Services Plan. Commenters are especially encouraged to provide input on 
the following:
    <bullet> Types of information that FNS should consider including in 
a Coordinated Services Plan template.
    <bullet> Recommendations about what metrics States are able to 
collect in relation to all summer nutrition programs (for example, 
metrics capturing the expansion of non-congregate meal service into 
previously under-served areas, metrics related to community engagement 
and support for families to access summer nutrition options).
    <bullet> Recommendations on how often Plans should be updated and 
resubmitted.
    <bullet> Recommendations on partnerships with other Federal, State, 
Tribal, and local agencies, as well as organizations involved in the 
administration of nutrition and human services programs, participants, 
and other stakeholders that States may want to consider consulting with 
for the creation of their Plans.
    <bullet> Specific recommendations on the steps States and ITOs 
could take to fully and substantively implement their plans.
    Accordingly, this rule establishes a new Sec.  225.3(e) in part 225 
and a new Sec.  292.10 in part 292 to require States to submit a 
Coordinated Services Plan.to require States to submit a Coordinated 
Services Plan.

V. Procedural Matters

    Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094. Executive Orders 12866 
and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available 
regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select 
regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential 
economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive 
impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance 
of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of 
harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.
    This interim final rule has been determined to be significant under 
section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 
14094, and was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in 
conformance with Executive Order 12866.

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    As required by Executive Order 12866, (as amended by Executive 
Order 14904), a Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) was developed for this 
interim final rule. It follows this rule as an appendix. The following 
summarizes the conclusions of the regulatory impact analysis:In total, 
the 10-year cost of the interim final rule is estimated at $40.3 
billion, with $7.4 billion attributed to non-congregate meal option 
implementation ($7.35 billion for program meal reimbursements and $43.2 
million for provision administration) and $32.9 billion in costs 
attributed to Summer EBT implementation ($28.0 billion for program 
benefits and $5.0 billion for program implementation and 
administration). These costs represent the operation of both provisions 
over a ten-year period between Fiscal Years (FY) 2023 and 2032. It 
should be noted that Summer EBT will not be implemented until 2024 and 
therefore all analyses pertaining to Summer EBT represent only nine 
years of program operation. Though some States may have already 
incurred costs in FY 2023 preparing for the implementation of Summer 
EBT in FY 2024, it is assumed that the costs estimated in FY 2024 are 
representative of the total cost of program implementation occurring 
either during or prior to Summer EBT rollout.
    The non-congregate meal provision is expected to increase 
participation among eligible populations in rural sites by 4.25 million 
children by 2027 (Year 5) with annual costs for associated meal 
reimbursements of just over $1 billion once peak participation is 
reached. Annual administrative burden to households add only marginally 
to these costs--between $0.2 million and $4.7 million annually, for a 
total of $29.3 million over ten years. The analysis also accounts for 
one-time costs associated with modifying operating systems to 
accommodate non-congregate meal service, which has been estimated at 
$250,000 per State agency, totaling $14.0 million across all 56 State 
agencies in 2023.
    It is expected that 25.0 million children out of approximately 30.1 
million eligible children will receive Summer EBT benefits, resulting 
in between $2.8 and $3.4 billion in benefits distributed each summer. 
Program implementation and administration costs, which include initial 
start-up costs equal to 30% of benefits administered and ongoing 
administrative costs equal to 7% of benefits administered, are expected 
to peak at $1 billion in 2024 and level off at $366 million by 2028. 
This includes expected administrative burden for Summer EBT retailers 
due to reporting and recordkeeping at $8.9 million, while the expected 
household burden of administrative tasks required for program 
participation (e.g., applications) for children not already certified 
as Free and Reduced-Price eligible is estimated at $149 million. The 
retailer costs are expected to be incurred primarily in Year 1 (2024). 
Total annual costs for Summer EBT benefits and administration are 
estimated at between $3.5 and $3.8 billion annually for a total nine-
year cost of $32.9 billion.
    This rule is expected to yield substantial public benefit, 
including improvements in nutrition security and diet quality and 
economic growth via retail transactions.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires Agencies 
to analyze the impact of rulemaking on small entities and consider 
alternatives

[[Page 90276]]

that would minimize any significant impacts on a substantial number of 
small entities. Pursuant to that review, it has been certified that 
this interim final rule would not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. The provisions of this interim 
final rule are intended to reflect the needs of program operators of 
all sizes. No specific additional burdens are placed on small program 
operators seeking to operate summer nutrition programs. Additionally, 
non-congregate meal service and Summer EBT are optional provisions, and 
there is no requirement for States, Tribes, and/or sponsors to 
participate.

Congressional Review Act and Administrative Procedure Act

    Pursuant to subtitle E of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (also known as the Congressional Review Act, 5 
U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget's Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule meets 
the criteria set forth in 5 U.S.C. 804(2). In addition, pursuant to 5 
U.S.C. 808(2), USDA has for good cause determined that the provisions 
of this interim final rule shall take effect immediately. A statutory 
requirement at 42 U.S.C. 1762(a) establishes a new program and 
specifies that it must begin in Summer 2024. Statutory requirements 
established at 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(13)(F) and 42 U.S.C. 1762(f) further 
specify that the promulgation of regulations (to include interim final 
regulations) must occur not later than December 29, 2023. In accord 
with congressional direction to issue these provisions through interim 
final regulations, USDA finds that notice and public procedure thereon 
are unnecessary and that, for good cause, this rule will take effect 
immediately under 5 U.S.C. 808(2).
    Furthermore, because this rule does not compel immediate action but 
rather provides the certainty that program stakeholders need to timely 
implement these regulatory provisions in support of Summer 2024 program 
operations and provide nutritious meals to children when school is not 
in session, all of which is consistent with congressional direction, 
there is no need for affected parties to have lead time to adjust their 
behavior before this rule takes effect. For these reasons USDA finds 
good cause for this rule to take effect immediately under 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(3).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 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, USDA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures by State, local, or Tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or the private sector, of $177 million or more (when 
adjusted for inflation; GDP deflator source: Table 1.1.9 at https://www.bea.gov/iTable) in any one year. When such a statement is needed 
for a rule, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires USDA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the most cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves 
the objectives of the rule.
    This interim final rule does not contain Federal mandates (under 
the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, 
and Tribal governments or the private sector of $177 million or more in 
any one year. Thus, the rule is not subject to the requirements of 
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

Executive Order 12372

    The Summer Food Service Program is listed in the Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance under Number 10.559. The Summer Electronic Benefit 
Transfer Program for Children is listed in the Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance under Number 10.646. The National School Lunch 
Program (which includes the Seamless Summer Option) is listed in the 
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under Number 10.555. They are 
subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental 
consultation with State and local officials. (See 2 CFR chapter IV.) 
Since the Child Nutrition Programs are State-administered, FNS has 
formal and informal discussions with State and local officials, 
including representatives of Indian Tribal Organizations, on an ongoing 
basis regarding program requirements and operations. This provides USDA 
with the opportunity to receive regular input from program 
administrators and contributes to the development of feasible program 
requirements.

Federalism Summary Impact Statement

    Executive Order 13132 requires Federal agencies to consider the 
impact of their regulatory actions on State and local governments. 
Where such actions have federalism implications, agencies are directed 
to provide a statement for inclusion in the preamble to the regulations 
describing the agency's considerations in terms of the three categories 
called for under section (6)(b)(2)(B) of Executive Order 13132.
    USDA has determined that this rule has Federalism implications.
    1. Prior Consultation with State and Local Agencies: FNS has 
gathered extensive input from national, State, and local community 
partners through a variety of public engagement activities. These 
include, but are not limited to, webinars, over 40 listening sessions 
with a diverse array of program stakeholders, and town hall style 
meetings. These activities have helped FNS monitor program operations, 
identify best practices, and take into consideration requests from 
States and local program operators. In addition, since Child Nutrition 
Programs are State administered, federally-funded programs, and FNS 
Regional offices have informal and formal discussions with State and 
local officials on an ongoing basis regarding program implementation 
and performance.
    2. Nature of Concerns and the Need to Issue this Rulemaking: 
Publication of this interim final rule is required under the provisions 
of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328). Program 
stakeholders expressed concerns related to the length of the 
implementation timeframe in advance of summer 2023 and 2024 operations, 
possible start-up and implementation costs, as well as the need for 
additional guidance and technical assistance from FNS to assist with 
implementation activities.
    3. Extent to Which We Meet These Concerns: FNS has made every 
effort to address these concerns, balancing the goal of meeting 
statutory requirements established around the publication of this 
interim final rule against the need to minimize administrative burden 
and provide necessary implementation support. This final rule takes 
into account and is responsive, where feasible, to public input 
received during the stakeholder consultation process to ensure the 
provisions of this interim final rule are implemented efficiently and 
in a manner that is least burdensome. In addition, FNS will solicit 
robust feedback through public comment rulemaking with the publication 
of this interim final rule, and will assess and respond to such public 
comments when promulgating a final rule.

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform

    This interim final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 
12988, Civil Justice Reform. This interim final rule is not intended to 
have preemptive

[[Page 90277]]

effect with respect to any State or local laws, regulations or policies 
which conflict with its provisions or which would otherwise impede its 
full and timely implementation.

Civil Rights Impact Analysis

    USDA has reviewed this rule in accordance with USDA Regulation 
4300-4, ``Civil Rights Impact Analysis,'' to identify any major civil 
rights impacts the rule might have on program participants on the basis 
of age, race, color, national origin, sex (including gender identity 
and sexual orientation) or disability.
    USDA believes that this rule will impact State agencies and local 
Program operators by increasing summer nutrition assistance for 
children between the introduction of both non-congregate meal service 
for rural areas and the establishment of the newly authorized Summer 
EBT Program. State agencies and Program operators will also be impacted 
by increased emphasis on accountability and strengthening monitoring 
efforts. However, mitigation strategies such as providing ample 
technical assistance and training to State agencies and Program 
operators will assist them with complying with the revised and newly 
established program requirements while also alleviating impacts that 
may result from the implementation of this rule.

Executive Order 13175

    Executive Order 13175 requires Federal agencies to consult and 
coordinate with Tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies 
that have Tribal implications, including regulations, legislative 
comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or 
actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian 
Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian 
Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. What follows is a summary of 
Tribal implications that are present and consultation/coordination 
taken to date:
    This rule has potential Tribal implications. FNS provided an 
opportunity for consultation on this issue on May 23, 2023. During the 
consultation, participating Tribal representatives expressed enthusiasm 
for the permanent availability of rural non-congregate meal service 
during the summer. Some concerns raised by attendees included operating 
under State-wide limitations on meal service options (one respondent 
specifically highlighted limitations on multi-day meal distribution), 
the inability to serve members of their Tribe that live outside their 
service area, and concern about the rural definition. In response to 
these issues, this interim final rule only permits State agencies to 
limit multi-meal issuance on a case-by-case basis for an individual 
sponsor, based on specific concerns regarding a sponsor's ability to 
ensure Program integrity, food safety, and meal quality. In addition, 
this interim final rule expands the previously established definition 
of rural in response to Tribal and other stakeholder concerns.
    In regard to Summer EBT, participating Tribal representatives also 
indicated excitement and interest in administering this program in the 
future, noting the significant potential health benefits for 
participants. However, concerns were raised regarding: the 50% 
administrative funding match requirement; the need to develop an MIS 
system to support program administration; the timeline to stand up a 
new program; ensuring ITOs are able to serve children in their 
jurisdictions; accessing data on children eligible for free and 
reduced-price school meals; and empowering Tribes to determine what 
foods may be purchased with Summer EBT benefits. In response to these 
concerns, the interim final rule clearly specifies the types of cash 
and in-kind contributions that ITO Summer EBT agencies may use to pay 
their 50% share of administrative funding, consistent with Federal 
administrative requirements. To address concerns about the timeline for 
developing a new program, the IFR will allow ITO Summer EBT agencies to 
receive administrative funding for a ``planning year'' if needed in 
2024, in anticipation of launching their program in 2025. The IFR will 
also provide ITO Summer EBT agencies with priority consideration to 
serve eligible children in their service areas while also allowing 
households of eligible children the option to participate in a State-
administered Summer EBT Program. This approach ensures that ITO-
administered Summer EBT Programs are the default choice for households 
in their communities, rather than automatically enrolling these 
children in the State-administered Summer EBT Program through 
streamlined certification. With regard to accessing student data, the 
interim final rule requires that an ITO and a State Summer EBT agency 
serving proximate geographic areas must ensure the coordination of 
Summer EBT program services, including the timely transfer of student 
eligibility information from the State Summer EBT agency to the ITO 
Summer EBT agency, as applicable. Finally, the interim final rule 
provides significant flexibility for ITO Summer EBT agencies to select 
which foods may be purchased through their Summer EBT Programs. As 
described in the rule, each ITO Summer EBT agency will propose its 
benefit delivery model [i.e., a cash-value benefit (CVB) model, a food 
package model, a combination of the two, or an alternate model] and 
will provide the list of supplemental foods which participants can 
purchase upon enrollment in the Summer EBT Program.
    If further consultation on the provisions of this final rule is 
requested, the Office of Tribal Relations will work with FNS to ensure 
quality consultation is provided.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35; see 5 
CFR part 1320) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
approve all collection of information requirements by a Federal agency 
before they can be implemented. Respondents are not required to respond 
to any collection of information unless it displays a current valid OMB 
control number. This interim final rule will codify provisions of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 that provides State agencies 
operating the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) the option to provide 
non-congregate meal service in rural areas with no congregate meal 
service and establishes a permanent summer electronic benefits transfer 
for children program (Summer EBT). As a result, the changes to SFSP 
meal delivery would provide flexibilities to program operators, 
including home delivery and parent pick-up meal service options, that 
would increase opportunities to rural children and families to benefit 
from SFSP. Likewise, the Summer EBT Program will ensure continued 
access to food when school is not in session for the summer.
    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 
interim final rule revises existing information collection requirements 
and contains new information collection requirements, which are subject 
to review and approval by OMB. The existing requirements are currently 
approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0280 7 CFR part 225 Summer Food 
Service Program, expiration date September 30, 2025. This interim final 
rule also introduces new information collection requirements into OMB 
Control Number 0584-0280. Furthermore, the interim final rule will add 
additional new information

[[Page 90278]]

collection requirements that extend the non-congregate meal service 
option to SFAs utilizing the Seamless Summer Option (SSO) of the 
National School Lunch Program (NSLP). Existing requirements for the SSO 
are currently approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0006, 7 CFR part 
210 National School Lunch Program, expiration date September 30, 2026. 
This interim final rule adds new information requirements and a new 
respondent group into OMB Control Number 0584-0006. In addition, this 
interim final rule is introducing new information collection 
requirements associated with the Summer EBT Program. This rulemaking 
revises existing and sets out new reporting and public disclosure 
requirements for State agencies, local sponsoring organizations, and 
non-profit private institutions and camps that administer the Summer 
Food Service Program (SFSP), as well as households that participate in 
the Program. This interim final rule also sets out new reporting, 
recordkeeping, and public disclosure requirements for Summer EBT 
agencies, Summer EBT Authorized Retailers, and households that will 
administer and participate in the Summer EBT Program.
    FNS is submitting for public comment the revisions to OMB Control 
Number 0584-0280, 7 CFR part 225, Summer Food Service Program, that 
will result from the adoption of this interim final rule. FNS is also 
submitting for public comment the revisions to OMB Control Number 0584-
0006, 7 CFR part 210 National School Lunch Program, that will result 
from the adoption of this interim final rule. In addition, FNS is 
requesting an OMB control number for a new information collection to 
contain the new reporting, recordkeeping, and public disclosure 
information collection requirements for the Summer EBT Program in 7 CFR 
part 292 that will result from this rulemaking and is also seeking 
public comment on this collection. Since this rule impacts three 
separate information collections, three separate PRA sections have been 
included to capture the burden impact that this interim final rule is 
estimated to have on these collections. The establishment of the 
information collection requirements and their associated burden are 
contingent upon OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 
When the information collection request is approved, the Department 
will publish a separate notice in the Federal Register announcing OMB's 
approval.
    Comments on the information collection in this interim final rule 
must be received by February 27, 2024.
    Comments may be sent to: J. Kevin Maskornick, Community Meals 
Policy Division, USDA Food and Nutrition Service, 1320 Braddock Place, 
Alexandria, VA 22314. Comments will also be accepted through the 
Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to https://www.regulations.gov, and 
follow the online instructions for submitting comments electronically.
    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of information 
is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, 
including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the 
accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of 
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions 
used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the 
information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the 
collection of information on those who are to respond, including use of 
appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
    All responses to this notification will be summarized and included 
in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter 
of public record.
    Title: 7 CFR part 210, National School Lunch Program.
    Form Number: None.
    OMB Control Number: 0584-0006.
    Expiration Date: 09/30/2026.
    Type of Request: Revision.
    Abstract: This is a revision adding new information collection 
requirements to the existing information collection approved under OMB 
Control Number 0584-0006, as a result of this interim final rule. Below 
is a summary of the changes in the rule and the accompanying reporting 
requirements for State agencies, school food authorities, and 
households that are being impacted by this rule.
    The interim final rule will codify provisions of the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 2023 that establish rural non-congregate service 
options in the Seamless Summer Option (SSO) of the National School 
Lunch Program (NSLP). In current regulations, there is not an option 
for rural schools to provide non-congregate meal service. The interim 
final rule allows schools, in an area designated as rural, to have the 
option to enroll as non-congregate schools for the summer operating 
period.
    This interim final rule will amend regulations 7 CFR 210.18(e) and 
210.34(a) to extend the non-congregate service option to SSO and 
require that State agencies conduct at least two site reviews of a 
school food authority (SFA) that chooses to operate non-congregate meal 
service through SSO.

Reporting

State Agencies and School Food Authorities

    The changes in this interim rule will add new reporting 
requirements to those that are currently approved under OMB Control 
Number 0584-0006 for State agencies and School Food Authorities (SFAs).
    USDA estimates that 56 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 210.18(e)(3)(ii) that the State agency must 
review the Seamless Summer Option (SSO), if the school food authority 
(SFA) operates congregate and non-congregate meal service, at a minimum 
of two sites, one congregate and one non-congregate. USDA estimates 
that the 56 State agencies will review 338 schools that operate non-
congregate meal service through SSO and that it takes approximately 2 
hours to complete this reporting requirement for each record, which is 
estimated to add a total of 37,895 annual burden hours and 18,947 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 1,997 school food authorities will be required 
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that an SFA operating the 
SSO in a rural area may be approved to offer a non-congregate meal 
service consistent with that established in part 225 of this chapter. 
USDA estimates that the 1,997 school food authorities each will approve 
3,111 meals consistent with non-congregate meal service during the 
summer operational period and that it takes approximately 5 minutes 
(0.0835 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 
a total of 518,698 annual burden hours and 6,211,948 responses into 
OMB's information collection inventory. Of the 6,211,948 meals being 
served, USDA estimates that 5% of non-congregate meals will be served 
utilizing the home delivery meal service option. Estimates from the 
ongoing Meals to You (MTY) demonstration estimate that the mailing 
costs associated with home delivery is equal to the SFSP lunch meal 
reimbursement rate. As such, USDA estimates that this requirement will 
also have $1,537,457.13 (6,211,948 meals * .05 * $4.95) in mailing 
costs.
    USDA expects that 1,997 school food authorities will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that an SFA must comply with 
the non-congregate meals service provisions set forth at Sec.  
225.16(b)(5)(i) to obtain prior

[[Page 90279]]

parental consent, if meals are to be delivered to a child's home. USDA 
expects that the 1,997 school food authorities will obtain 3 adult 
consent forms annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 5,647 
annual burden hours and 5,647 responses into OMB's information 
collection inventory.
    USDA estimates that 1,997 school food authorities will be required 
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that an SFA must comply 
with the non-congregate meals service provisions set forth at Sec.  
225.16(b)(5)(iv) to claim reimbursement for all eligible meals served 
to children at sites in areas in which poor economic conditions exist, 
as defined in Sec.  225.2. At all other sites, only the non-congregate 
meals served to children who meet the eligibility standards for this 
Program may be reimbursed. USDA estimates that the 1,997 school food 
authorities will report reimbursement claims for 55 days during the 
summer operating period annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour 
to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 
109,835 annual burden hours and 109,835 responses into OMB's 
information collection inventory.
    USDA expects that 1,997 school food authorities will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that an SFA may use the non-
congregate meal service options contained in Sec.  225.16(i). SFAs 
electing to operate non-congregate meal service must have a system in 
place to ensure that the proper number of meals are distributed to each 
eligible child. USDA expects that the 1,997 school food authorities 
will have a system in place to ensure that the proper number of meals 
are distributed to each eligible child annually and that it takes 
approximately 5 hours to complete this requirement, which adds a total 
of 9,985 annual burden hours and 1,997 responses into OMB's information 
collection inventory.
    USDA estimates that 1,997 school food authorities will be required 
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that an SFA may use the 
non-congregate meal service options contained in Sec.  225.16(i) of 
this chapter. USDA estimates that the 1,997 school food authorities 
will have procedures in place to ensure that bulk meal components meet 
the requirements annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to 
complete this requirement, which adds a total of 3,994 annual burden 
hours and 1,997 responses into OMB's information collection inventory.

Households

    The changes to be implemented in this rule will add households, and 
reporting requirements for those households, to the types of 
respondents and information collection requirements that are currently 
approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0006. Currently, households are 
not part of the respondents currently covered under this collection.
    USDA estimates that 5,647 households will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that households provide written 
consent to participate in the Program at a rural site that utilizes the 
home delivery option. USDA estimates that 5,647 households will submit 
a parental consent form annually and that it takes approximately 15 
minutes (0.25 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add a total of 1,412 annual burden hours, 5,647 responses, and 5,647 
respondents into OMB's information collection inventory.
    USDA expects that 5,647 households will be required to fulfill the 
requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that households travel to the parent or 
guardian pick-up site to take meals home to their children. USDA 
expects that the 5,647 households will travel to the pick-up site once 
a week for a total of 11 weeks during the summer operational period 
annually, and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 124,239 annual burden 
hours, 62,119 responses, and 5,647 respondents into OMB's information 
collection inventory.
    As a result of this interim final rule, USDA estimates that the 
burden for this existing information collection will increase to a 
total of 127,229 respondents, 54,050,134 responses, and 10,620,405 
burden hours, which is an increase of 13,347 respondents, 6,418,138 
responses, 811,704 burden hours. The average burden per response and 
the annual burden hours are explained below and summarized in the 
charts which follow. Once the information collection request (ICR) for 
the final rule is approved, USDA estimates that the burden for OMB 
Control Number 0584-0006 will increase by 6,418,138 responses, 811,704 
burden hours, 11,294 respondents, and $1,537,457.13 in total costs.
    For NSLP, USDA estimates a cost of $769.88 per school food 
authority in mailing costs to provide home delivered meals to 
households in areas designated as rural due to this interim final rule. 
Therefore, as a result of what's outlined in this interim final rule, 
USDA estimates that this collection is expected to have $1,537,457.13 
in costs related to the provision of home delivered meals that will be 
added to the currently approved burden for NSLP under OMB Control 
Number 0584-0006.

Reporting

    Respondents (Affected Public): Households and State, local, and 
Tribal government. The respondent groups identified include households, 
school food authorities, and State agencies.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 13,347 respondents.
    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 481 responses.
    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 6,418,138 responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 0.1 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 811,704 hours.
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P

[[Page 90280]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.000


[[Page 90281]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.001


[[Page 90282]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.002

BILLING CODE 3410-30-C

[[Page 90283]]



                            Summary of Burden
                            [OMB #0584-0006]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total No. Respondents......................................      127,229
Average No. Responses per Respondent.......................          425
Total Annual Responses.....................................   54,050,134
Average Hours per Response.................................         0.19
Total Burden Hours.........................................   10,620,405
Current OMB Approved Burden Hours..........................    9,808,701
Adjustments................................................            0
Program Changes............................................      811,704
Total Difference in Burden.................................      811,704
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: 7 CFR part 225, Summer Food Service Program.
    Form Number: FNS-905, approved in OMB Control # 0584-0649, 
expiration date, December 31st, 2025.
    OMB Control Number: 0584-0280.
    Expiration Date: 09/30/2025.
    Type of Request: Revision.
    Abstract: This is a revision which introduces new information 
collection requirements and revises existing information collection 
requirements into the information collection currently approved under 
OMB Control Number 0584-0280, as a result of this interim final rule. 
Below is a summary of the changes in the rule and the accompanying 
reporting and public disclosure requirements for the State/local/Tribal 
agencies, non-profit institutions, camps, and participating households 
that are being impacted by this rule.
    The interim final rule will codify provisions of the Consolidated 
appropriations Act of 2023 that establish rural non-congregate meal 
service options in SFSP. In current regulations, there is not an option 
for rural sites to provide non-congregate meal service. The interim 
final rule allows sites, in an area designated as rural, to have the 
option to enroll as non-congregate sites for the summer operating 
period.
    Currently, the regulations define ``rural'' as any areas in a 
county which is not a part of a Metropolitan Statistical Area or any 
``pocket'' within a Metropolitan Statistical Area which is determined 
to be geographically isolated from urban areas. The interim final rule 
will expand the ``rural'' definition to also include any census tract 
classified as a non-metropolitan area based on Rural-Urban Commuting 
Area codes, areas of a Metropolitan Statistical Area which is not part 
of a Census Bureau-defined urban area, and areas of a State which are 
not part of an urban areas as determined by the Secretary. These 
revisions will expand access to SFSP by increasing the defined total 
rural service area. This will provide more program operators with an 
additional option for offering no-cost meals to children in rural 
areas.
    This interim final rule will amend 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5) and (i) to 
define non-congregate meal service and the options available under the 
new meal service provisions. The revisions will establish the sponsors 
eligible for the new meal service options and the requirements for 
rural non-congregate participation.

Reporting

State/Local/Tribal Governments

    The changes in this rule will introduce new reporting requirements 
and impact existing ones in the information collection currently 
approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0280 for State/local/Tribal 
governments.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 225.3(e)(1) that State agencies must 
establish, and update annually as needed, a coordinated services plan 
to coordinate the statewide availability of services offered through 
the Summer Food Service Program described in this part and the Summer 
EBT program established in 7 CFR part 292. USDA estimates that the 53 
State agencies will be required to submit a coordinated services plan 
annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this 
reporting requirement for the plans. This new requirement will add 53 
hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfil 
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.4(d)(7) that State agencies must 
develop a plan for ensuring compliance with the food service management 
company procurement requirements set forth at Sec.  225.6(l). USDA 
estimates that the 53 State agencies will be required to develop a 
compliance plan annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 265 
annual burden hours and 53 responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.4(d)(8) that State agencies must 
provide an estimate of the State's need for monies available to pay for 
the cost of conducting health inspections and meal quality tests. USDA 
estimates that the 53 State agencies will be required to conduct a 
budget estimate for conducting health and meal quality inspections 
annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 265 annual burden 
hours and 53 responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.4(d)(9) that State agencies must 
include in the Program Management Administration Plan (MAP) a plan to 
provide a reasonable opportunity for children to access meals across 
all areas of the State. USDA estimates that the 53 State agencies will 
be required to include a plan to provide a reasonable opportunity for 
children to access meals across all areas of the State as a part of 
their MAP annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete 
this requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 265 annual 
burden hours and 53 responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.4(d)(10) that State agencies must include 
in the Program Management Administration Plan (MAP) a plan for Program 
delivery in areas that could benefit the most from the provision of 
non-congregate meals, including the State's plan to identify areas with 
no congregate meal service, and target priority areas for non-
congregate meal service. USDA expects that the 53 State agencies will 
be required to submit the Program delivery plan annually as a part of 
their MAP and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 265 annual burden 
hours and 53 responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(a)(2) that State agencies must identify 
rural areas with no congregate meal service and encourage participating 
sponsors to provide non-congregate meals in those areas. USDA expects 
that 53 State agencies will be required to identify rural areas within 
their State annually and that it will take approximately 5 hours to 
complete this rural identification, which is estimated to add 265 hours 
and 53 responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(b)(6) that State agencies may 
approve exceptions for any sponsor to operate more than 200 sites or to 
serve more than an average of 50,000 children per day, if the applicant 
demonstrates it has the capability of managing a program larger than 
these limits, and the SA has the capacity to conduct reviews of at 
least 10 percent of the sponsor's sites, as described in Sec.  
225.7(e)(4)(v). USDA estimates that the 53 State agencies will

[[Page 90284]]

each approve exceptions for at least 1 sponsor annually for a total of 
76 responses and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the 
requirement, which is estimated to add 76 annual burden hours and 
responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(2) that State agencies must review 
applications submitted by new sponsors, new sites, and, as determined 
by the State agency, sponsors and sites which have experienced 
significant operational problems, for the provided information on the 
procedures that document meals are only distributed, to a reasonable 
extent, to eligible children and that duplicate meals are not 
distributed to any child, if the applicant sponsor is electing to use 
the non-congregate meal service options described in Sec.  225.16(i)(1) 
and (2). USDA expects that the 53 State agencies will each review 20 
applications annually for a total of 1,066 responses and that it takes 
approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to 
add 1,066 annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 640 local government sponsors will be required 
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(2)(ix) that new 
sponsors, new sites, and, as determined by the State agency, sponsors 
and sites which have experienced significant operational problems must 
provide information on the procedures that document meals are only 
distributed, to a reasonable extent, to eligible children and that 
duplicate meals are not distributed to any child if the applicant 
sponsor is electing to use the non-congregate meal service options 
described in Sec.  225.16(i)(1) and (2). USDA estimates that 640 local 
government sponsors will each provide information on their procedures 
to document meals annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to 
complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 640 annual burden 
hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(3)(viii) that State agencies must 
review applications submitted by experienced sponsors and experienced 
sites and review provided information on the procedures that document 
meals are only distributed, to a reasonable extent, to eligible 
children and that duplicate meals are not distributed to any child, if 
the applicant sponsor is electing to use the non-congregate meal 
service options described in Sec.  225.16(i)(1) and (2). USDA expects 
that the 53 State agencies will review provided information from 84 
sponsors for a total of 4,458 responses and that it takes approximately 
1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 4,458 
annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 2,675 local government sponsors will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(3)(viii) that 
experienced sponsors and experienced sites must provide information on 
the procedures that document that meals are only distributed, to a 
reasonable extent, to eligible children and that duplicate meals are 
not distributed to any child, if the applicant sponsor is elected to 
use the non-congregate meal service options described in Sec.  
225.16(i)(1) and (2). USDA estimates that 2,675 local government 
sponsors will be required to provide information annually and that it 
takes approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is 
estimated to add 2,675 annual burden hours and responses to the 
collection.
    USDA expects that 567 local government sponsors will be required to 
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(f)(1)(iii) that sponsors 
must submit the policy statement of all camps and conditional non-
congregate sites that charge separately for meals that includes 
specific eligibility information and a copy of its hearing procedures 
with its application. USDA expects that the 567 local government 
sponsors will need to submit the policy statement annually with its 
application and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the 
requirement, which is estimated to add 567 total annual burden hours 
and responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(g)(1) that State agencies must 
review the site information sheet submitted by sponsors, for new sites 
where non-congregate meal service is proposed for the first time. USDA 
estimates that the 53 State agencies will review at least 1 site 
information sheet annually for a total of 53 responses and that it will 
take approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is 
estimated to add 53 annual burden hours and responses to the 
collection.
    USDA expects that 38 local government sponsors will be required to 
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(g)(1) that sponsors must 
submit documentation, for new sites where non-congregate meals service 
is proposed for the first time, once every five years, or earlier if 
the State agency determines that an area's rural status has changed 
significantly since the last designation, on the site information 
sheet. USDA expects that the 38 local government sponsors will submit 
documentation once every five years for a total 8 responses annually 
and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, 
which is estimated to add 8 annual burden hours and responses to the 
collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the new requirement at 7 CFR 226.6(g)(2) that State agencies must 
review the site information sheet submitted by sponsors, for 
experienced sites where non-congregate meal service is proposed for the 
first time. USDA estimates that the 53 State agencies will review 3 
site information sheets annually for a total of 177 annual responses 
and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, 
which is estimated to add 177 annual burden hours and responses to the 
collection.
    USDA expects that 529 local government sponsors will be required to 
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(g)(2) that sponsors must 
submit documentation, for experienced sites where non-congregate meal 
service operation is proposed for the first time, once every 5 years, 
or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's rural status 
has changed significantly since the last designation, on the site 
information sheet. USDA expects that the 529 local government sponsors 
will submit documentation once every five years for a total of 106 
responses annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete 
the requirement, which is estimated to add 106 annual burden hours and 
responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 53 local government sponsors will be required to 
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(h)(3) and (4) that State 
agencies must ensure that sites applying for non-congregate meal 
service, or sites applying for both congregate and non-congregate meal 
service, meet the requirements for non-congregate meal service. USDA 
estimates that 53 State agencies will submit 18 responses annually and 
that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which 
is estimated to add 946 hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 local government sponsors will be required 
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(d) that State agencies must 
review sponsors and sites to ensure compliance with Program 
regulations, including all applicant sponsors that did not participate 
in the prior year, all applicant sponsors that had operational problems 
noted in the prior year, and all

[[Page 90285]]

sites that the State agency has determined need a pre-approval visit, 
including sites did not participate in the prior year or sites that are 
new to non-congregate meal service. USDA estimates that 53 local 
government agencies will submit 485 responses annually and that it 
takes approximately 2 hours to complete this requirement for each 
record. The interim final rule is increasing the number of estimated 
sites that must respond to this requirement, which in turn increases 
the responses for this collection by 946 responses, from 24,764 to 
25,710 responses. This results in an increase in the burden hours for 
this requirement by 49,364 hours, from 2,055 to 51,419 hours per year.
    USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(d)(2) that State agencies may conduct 
pre-approval visits of a CACFP institution if it was reviewed by the 
State agency under their respective programs during the preceding 12 
months, and had no significant deficiencies noted in that review. USDA 
expects that the 53 State agencies will review 64 CACFP institutions 
annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 6,750 annual burden hours and 
3,375 responses into OMB's information collection inventory.
    USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(d)(4) that State agencies must establish 
a process to determine which sites need a pre-approval visit, including 
sites that did not participate in the Program in the prior year, 
existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service and existing 
sites that exhibited operational problems in the prior year. USDA 
expects that 53 State agencies will establish a process annually and 
that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete this requirement, which 
is estimated to add 265 hours and 53 responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(e)(4)(i) that State agencies must 
conduct a review of every new sponsor at least once during the first 
year of operation. USDA estimates that the 53 State agencies will 
conduct a review of 7 new sponsors annually for a total of 370 
responses and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete the 
requirement, which is estimated to add 740 annual burden hours and 370 
responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(e)(4)(ii) that State agencies must 
annually review every sponsor that experienced significant operational 
problems in the prior year. USDA expects that the 53 State agencies 
will conduct a review of 3 sponsors with significant operation problems 
annually for a total of 159 responses and that it takes approximately 2 
hours to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 318 annual 
burden hours and 159 responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(e)(4)(iii) that State agencies must 
review each sponsor at least once every three years. USDA estimates 
that the 53 State agencies will review at least 35 sponsors annually 
for a total of 1,841 responses and that it will take approximately 2 
hours to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 3,683 
annual burden hours and 1,841 responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(e)(4)(iv) that State agencies may review 
sponsors that require additional technical assistance more frequently 
at their own discretion. USDA expects that the 53 State agencies will 
review 3 sponsors annually for a total of 159 responses and that it 
takes approximately 2 hours to complete the requirement, which is 
estimated to add 318 annual burden hours and 159 responses to the 
collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the new requirements at 7 CFR 225.7(j) that State agencies must develop 
and provide monitor review forms to all approved sponsors. USDA 
estimates that the 53 State agencies will each develop a monitor review 
form annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete the 
requirement, which is estimated to add 265 annual burden hours and 53 
responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 3,314 local government sponsors will be required 
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(j) that sponsors must 
complete provided monitor review forms and include the required 
information. USDA expects that the 3,314 local government sponsors will 
complete a monitor review form annually and that it takes approximately 
1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 3,314 
annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
requirement at 7 CFR 225.8(e) that State agencies, by May 1 of each 
fiscal year, submit to FNS a list of open site locations and their 
operational details via the Summer Meal Site Locator form (FNS-905) and 
update weekly as needed, with a minimum of 3 updates during the summer 
operational period. USDA expects that 53 State agencies will submit 3 
Summer Meal Site Locator forms annually for a total of 159 responses 
and that it takes approximately 7.5 minutes (0.125 hours) to complete 
this requirement. The reporting burden for the FNS-905 is already 
accounted for in a separate information collection for OMB Control 
Number 0584-0649, Summer Food Sites Locations for State Agencies. This 
requirement is currently voluntary but the interim final rule changes 
it to a mandatory requirement for the participating State agencies. 
Therefore, USDA estimates that an additional 20 annual burden hours and 
159 responses beyond what is currently approved for this requirement 
will be needed due to this interim final rule. To account for this 
burden, USDA is adding this requirement into this collection and 
estimates that it will add 20 burden hours and 159 responses into the 
collection. USDA intends to incorporate the burden associated with the 
requirement at 7 CFR 225.8(e) into the information collection for OMB 
Control Number 0584-0649, at a later date.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.8(e) that State agencies will update 
Information Systems (IS) to facilitate the submission of FNS-905 forms 
to FNS. USDA estimates that the 53 State agencies will each need to 
update their Information Systems to support the submission of FNS-905 
forms to FNS and that it will take approximately 10 hours to complete 
the requirement. Furthermore, USDA estimates that each of the 53 State 
agencies incur a total of $14,542.96 in start-up costs to complete the 
requirement. USDA estimates that this requirement will add 530 annual 
burden hours, 53 responses, and $14,542.96 in costs to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 28 local government sponsors will be required 
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(6) that sponsors that 
operate non-congregate meal service and deliver meals directly to 
children's homes obtain written parental participation consent. USDA 
estimates that 28 local government agencies will submit 226 responses 
annually and that it takes approximately 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,603 hours and 
6,410 responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 567 local government sponsors will be required to

[[Page 90286]]

fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(7) that sponsors that 
operate conditional non-congregate sites must certify that it will 
collect information to determine children's Program eligibility to 
support its claims for reimbursement. USDA expects that 567 local 
government agencies will submit a certification annually and that it 
takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 567 hours and responses will be added to the 
collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(1) that SAs must develop training 
for administrative and site personnel, which must include: the purpose 
of the Program, site eligibility, recordkeeping, congregate and non-
congregate meal services, meal pattern requirements, and the duties of 
the monitor. USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will need to develop 
training for SFSP annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 530 annual burden 
hours and 53 responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 3,314 local government sponsors will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(1) that 
sponsors must hold Program training sessions for its administrative and 
site personnel, which must include: the purpose of the Program, site 
eligibility, recordkeeping, congregate and non-congregate meal 
services, meal pattern requirements, and the duties of the monitor. 
USDA estimates that the 3,314 local government sponsors will each 
conduct a training session for its administrative and site personnel 
annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 16,570 annual burden hours and 
3,314 responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 3,314 local government sponsors will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(1) that 
sponsors must provide documentation that its administrative personnel 
have attended the State agency training provided to the sponsors. USDA 
estimates that the 3,314 local government sponsors will each submit 
documentation annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 3,314 annual 
burden hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 3,314 local government sponsors will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(2) that 
sponsors must conduct pre-operational visits for new sites, including 
existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service, sites that 
experienced operational problems the previous year, and sites that have 
experienced significant staff turnover from the prior year before a 
site operates the Program to determine that the sites have the 
facilities and capability to provide and conduct the proposed meal 
service for the anticipated number of children. USDA estimates that 
3,314 local government agencies will conduct 9 pre-operational visits 
annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 60,787 hours and 30,393 
responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 3,314 local government sponsors will be 
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(3) that sponsors 
must visit each of their sites at least once during the first week of 
operation under the Program. USDA estimates that the 3,314 local 
government sponsors will conduct 9 site visits annually for a total of 
30,393 responses and that it takes approximately 30 minutes (0.5 hours) 
to complete the requirement for a total of 15,197 hours. This reporting 
requirement is currently approved in OMB Control Number 0584-0280, 7 
CFR part 225, Summer Food Service Program, at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(2), but 
the interim final rule moves the requirement to 7 CFR 225.15(d)(3). 
USDA also estimates that the number of responses will increase by 567, 
from 29,826 to 30,393 responses, and that the number of annual burden 
hours will increase by 284, from 14,913 to 15,197 burden hours.
    USDA expects that 3,314 local government sponsors will be required 
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(4) that sponsors must 
review food service operations for all sites at least once during the 
first four weeks of Program operations, and thereafter maintain a 
reasonable level of monitoring. USDA expects that the 3,314 local 
government sponsors will review 9 food service operations annually for 
a total 30,393 responses and that it takes approximately 2 hours to 
complete the requirement for a total of 60,787 hours. This requirement 
is currently approved in OMB Control Number 0584-0280 at 7 CFR 
225.15(d)(3), but the interim final rule moves this requirement to 7 
CFR 225.15(d)(4). USDA also estimates that the number of responses will 
increase by 567, from 29,826 to 30,393 responses, and that the number 
of annual burden hours will increase by 1,135, from 59,652 to 60,787 
burden hours.
    USDA estimates that 567 local government sponsors will be required 
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(i) that a sponsor 
that is approved to provide non-congregate meals in rural areas with no 
congregate meal service must obtain prior parental consent, if meals 
are to be delivered to a child's home. USDA estimates that the 567 
local government sponsors will obtain 11 parental consent forms 
annually for a total of 6,410 responses and that it takes approximately 
1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 6,410 
annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 567 local government sponsors will be required to 
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(ii) that a sponsor 
that is approved to provide parent or guardian pick-up non-congregate 
meals in rural areas with no congregate meal service must serve meals 
as described in paragraph (b)(3) of 7 CFR 225.16. USDA expects that the 
567 local government sponsors will serve 11,805 meals annually for a 
total of 6,698,902 responses and that it takes approximately 5 minutes 
(0.0835 hours) to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 
559,358 annual burden hours and 6,698,902 responses to the collection. 
Of the 6,698,902 meals being served, USDA estimates that 5% of non-
congregate meals will be served utilizing the home delivery meal 
service option. Estimates from the ongoing Meals to You (MTY) 
demonstration estimate that the mailing costs associated with home 
delivery is equal to the SFSP lunch meal reimbursement rate. As such, 
USDA estimates that $1,657,978.25 (6,698,902 meals * .05 * $4.95) in 
mailing costs will be associated with this requirement.
    USDA estimates that 567 local government sponsors will be required 
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(ii) that a sponsor 
that is approved to provide multi-day meal issuance or bulk meal 
component non-congregate meals in rural areas with no congregate meals 
service must serve meals as described in paragraph (b)(3) of 7 CFR 
225.16. USDA expects that the 567 local government sponsors will serve 
621 meals annually for a total of 352,574 responses and that it takes 
approximately 2 hours to complete the requirement, which is estimated 
to add 705,148 annual burden hours and 352,574 responses to the 
collection.
    USDA expects that 567 local government sponsors will be required to 
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(iv) that a sponsor 
that is approved to provide non-congregate meals in rural areas with no 
congregate meal service must claim reimbursement for all eligible meals 
served to children at sites in areas in which poor economic

[[Page 90287]]

conditions exist, as defined in Sec.  225.2. At all other sites, only 
the non-congregate meals served to children who meet the eligibility 
standards for this Program may be reimbursed. USDA expects that the 567 
local government sponsors will submit reimbursement claims for 55 days 
during the summer operating period annually, for a total of 31,211 
responses and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the 
requirement, which is estimated to add 31,211 annual burden hours and 
responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 567 local government sponsors will be required 
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(i) that sponsors 
electing to operate multi-day meal issuance, parent or guardian pick-
up, or bulk meal component non-congregate meal service must have a 
system in place to ensure that the proper number of meals are 
distributed to each eligible child. USDA estimates that 567 local 
government agencies will need to ensure that a system is in place 
annually, for 567 responses, and that it takes approximately 5 hours to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 2,837 hours and 
567 responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 188 local government sponsors will be required to 
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(i)(3) that sponsors 
electing to serve bulk meal components must ensure that required food 
components for each reimbursable meal are served, as described in 
paragraph (d) of 7 CFR 225.16. USDA expects that the 188 local 
government sponsors will have procedures in place to ensure that bulk 
meal components meal service meets the requirements annually and that 
it takes approximately 2 hours to complete the requirement; which is 
estimated to add 3,376 annual burden hours and 188 responses to the 
collection.
    USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 225.3(b) to notify USDA if it intends to 
administer SFSP, by January 1 of each fiscal year, and submit an 
agreement that contains assurance that the State agency will comply 
with policy, instructions, guidance, and handbooks issued by FNS. USDA 
estimates that the 53 State agencies will be required to notify USDA 
annually and that it takes approximately 36 hours to complete this 
requirement. The interim final rule revises the submission date for the 
currently approved Program agreement from November 1 to January 1. As 
such, the 1,908 total annual burden hours and 56 responses will remain 
unchanged from the currently approved collection.
    USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
requirement at 7 CFR 225.8(d)(2) that State agencies within 5 days of 
approval of sponsors, must notify the appropriate FNSRO of sponsors, 
approved sites, locations, days of operation, estimated daily 
attendance, type of site approval, and other important details about 
each site. USDA expects that 53 State agencies will notify the 
appropriate FNSRO 104 times annually, once for each operating sponsor, 
and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement. 
This is an existing requirement that is currently approved in OMB 
Control Number 0584-0280. The interim final rule adds type of site 
approval to the information collected about the site. This revision, 
however, is not expected to change the currently approved burden of 
5,512 annual burden hours and responses.

Businesses (Non-Profit Institutions and Camps)

    The changes in this rule will introduce new reporting requirements 
and impact existing ones in the information collection currently 
approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0280 for Non-profit Institutions 
and Camps.
    USDA estimates that 426 non-profit institutions and camps be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(2)(ix) that 
new sponsors, new sites, and, as determined by the State agency, 
sponsors and sites which have experienced significant operational 
problems must provide information on the procedures that document meals 
are only distributed, to a reasonable extent, to eligible children and 
that duplicate meals are not distributed to any child, if the applicant 
sponsor is electing to use the non-congregate meal service options 
described in Sec.  225.16(i)(1) and (2). USDA estimates that the 426 
non-profit institutions and camps will provide information on their 
procedures annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete 
the requirement, which is estimated to add 426 annual burden hours and 
responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 1,783 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(3)(viii) that 
experienced sponsors and experienced sites must provide information on 
the procedures that document meals are only distributed, to a 
reasonable extent, to eligible children and that duplicate meals are 
not distributed to any child. USDA expects that the 1,783 non-profit 
institutions and camps will provide information on their procedures 
annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the 
requirement, which is estimated to add 1,783 annual burden hours and 
responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(f)(1)(iii) that 
sponsors submit the policy statement of all camps and conditional non-
congregate sites that charge separately for meals that includes 
specific eligibility information and a copy of its hearing procedures 
with its application. USDA estimates that the 378 non-profit 
institutions and camps will submit a policy statement annually and that 
it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is 
estimated to add 378 annual burden hours and responses to the 
collection.
    USDA expects that 25 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(g)(1) that 
sponsors must submit documentation, for new sites where non-congregate 
meal service operation is proposed for the first time, once every 5 
years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's rural 
status has changed significantly since the last designation, on the 
site information sheet. USDA expects that the 25 non-profit 
institutions and camps will submit documentation once every 5 years for 
a total of 5 responses annual and that it takes approximately 1 hour to 
complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 5 annual burden 
hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 353 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(g)(2) that 
sponsors must submit documentation, for experienced sites where non-
congregate meal service operation is proposed for the first time, once 
every 5 years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an 
area's rural status has changed significantly since the last 
designation, on the site information sheet. USDA estimates that the 353 
non-profit institutions and camps will submit documentation once every 
five years for a total of 71 responses annually and that it takes 
approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to 
add 71 annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 2,210 non-profit businesses and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirements at 7 CFR 225.7(j) that 
sponsors must complete provided monitor review forms and include the 
required information. USDA expects that the 2,210 non-profit 
institutions and camps will be required

[[Page 90288]]

to complete the monitor review form annually and that it takes 
approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to 
add 2,210 annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 19 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(6) that 
sponsors that operate non-congregate meal service and deliver meals 
directly to children's homes must obtain participation consent from an 
adult household member. USDA expects that 19 non-profit institutions 
and camps will collect 226 consent forms annually and that it takes 
approximately 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 1,069 hours and 4,275 responses to the 
collection.
    USDA estimates that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(7) that 
sponsors that operate a conditional non-congregate site must certify 
that it will collect information to determine children's Program 
eligibility to support its claims for reimbursement. USDA estimates 
that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will certify that it will 
collect information annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 378 hours and 
responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(8) that 
sponsors that are not a school food authority (SFA) must enter into a 
written agreement or Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) with the State 
agency or SFA if it chooses to receive school data to determine 
children's Program eligibility, as required under Sec.  225.15(k). USDA 
expects that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will enter an MOU 
annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 2,210 hours and responses to the 
collection.
    USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(1) that 
sponsors must hold Program training sessions for its administrative and 
site personnel. USDA estimates that the 2,210 non-profit institutions 
and camps will hold a training session annually for administrative and 
site personnel and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete the 
requirement; which is estimated to add 11,050 annual burden hours and 
2,210 responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(1) that 
sponsors must provide documentation that its administrative personnel 
have attended the State agency training provided to the sponsors. USDA 
estimates that the 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will provide 
documentation annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to 
complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 2,210 annual burden 
hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(2) that sponsors 
must conduct pre-operational visits for new sites, including existing 
sites that are new to non-congregate meal service, and sites that 
experienced operational problems the previous year before a site 
operates the Program to determine that the sites have the facilities 
and capability to provide and conduct the proposed meal service for the 
anticipated number of children. USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit 
institutions and camps will conduct 9 pre-operational visits annually 
and that it takes approximately 30 minutes (0.5 hours) to complete this 
requirement; which is estimated to add 10,134 hours and 20,268 
responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 2,210 local government sponsors will be 
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(3) that sponsors 
must visit each of their sites at least once during the first week of 
operation under the Program. USDA estimates that the 2,210 local 
government sponsors will conduct 9 site visits annually for a total of 
20,268 responses and that it takes approximately 30 minutes (0.5 hours) 
to complete the requirement for a total of 10,134 hours. This 
requirement is currently approved in OMB Control Number 0584-0280, 7 
CFR part 225, Summer Food Service Program, at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(2), but 
the interim final rule moves the requirement to 7 CFR 225.15(d)(3). 
USDA also estimates that the number of responses will increase by 378, 
from 19,890 to 20,268 responses, and that the number of annual burden 
hours will increase by 189, from 9,945 to 10,134 hours.
    USDA expects that 2,210 local government sponsors will be required 
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(4) that sponsors must 
review food service operations for all sites at least once during the 
first four weeks of Program operations, and thereafter maintain a 
reasonable level of monitoring. USDA expects that the 2,210 local 
government sponsors will review 9 food service operations annually for 
a total 20,268 responses and that it takes approximately 2 hours to 
complete this requirement for a total of 40,537 hours. This requirement 
is currently approved in OMB Control Number 0584-0280 at 7 CFR 
225.15(d)(3), but the interim final rule moves it to 7 CFR 
225.15(d)(4). USDA also estimates that the number of responses will 
increase by 378, from 19,890 to 20,268 responses, and that the number 
of annual burden hours will increase by 757, from 39,780 to 40,537 
hours.
    USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(f) that 
sponsors may also use the household application procedures to identify 
eligible children in non-area eligible areas instead of entering into a 
written agreement or MOU with the local SFA. USDA estimates that the 
2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will use household application 
procedures to identify 26 eligible children each for a total of 58,365 
responses annually and that it takes approximately 30 minutes (0.5 
hours) to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 29,183 
annual burden hours and 58,365 responses into the collection.
    USDA expects that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(i) that a 
sponsor that is approved to provide non-congregate meals in rural areas 
with no congregate meal service must obtain prior parental consent, if 
meals are to be delivered to a child's home. USDA expects that the 378 
non-profit institutions and camps will obtain 11 parental consent forms 
for a total of 4,275 responses annually and that it takes approximately 
1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 4,275 
annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(ii) that 
a sponsor that is approved to provide parent or guardian pick-up of 
non-congregate meals in rural areas with no congregate meal service 
must serve meals as described in paragraph (b)(3) of 7 CFR 225.16. USDA 
estimates that the 378 non-profit institutions and camps will each 
serve 11,805 meals for a total of 4,467,283 responses annually and that 
it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.0835 hours) to complete the 
requirement, which is estimated to add 373,018 annual burden hours and 
4,467,283 responses to the collection. Of the 4,467,283 meals being 
served, USDA estimates that 5% of non-

[[Page 90289]]

congregate meals will be served utilizing the home delivery meal 
service option. Estimates from the ongoing Meals to You (MTY) 
demonstration estimate that the mailing costs associated with home 
delivery is equal to the SFSP lunch meal reimbursement rate. As such, 
USDA estimates that $1,105,652.54 (4,467,2831,337,472 meals * .05 * 
$4.95) in mailing costs will also be added to this requirement.
    USDA expects that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(ii) that 
a sponsor that is approved to provide multi-day meal issuance or bulk 
meal component non-congregate meal service in rural areas with no 
congregate meal service must serve meals as described in paragraph 
(b)(3) of 7 CFR 225.16. USDA expects that the 378 non-profit 
institutions and camps will each serve 621 meals for a total of 235,120 
responses annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete 
the requirement, which is estimated to add 470,240 annual burden hours 
and 235,120 to the collection.
    USDA estimates that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(iv) that 
a sponsor that is approved to provide non-congregate meals in rural 
areas with no congregate meal service must claim reimbursement for all 
eligible meals served to children at sites in areas in which poor 
economic conditions exist, as defined in Sec.  225.2. At all other 
sites, only the non-congregate meals served to children who meet the 
eligibility standards for this Program may be reimbursed. USDA 
estimates that the 378 non-profit institutions and camps will each 
submit reimbursement claims for 55 days during the summer operational 
period annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the 
requirement, which is estimated to add 20,814 annual burden hours and 
responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(i) that 
sponsors electing to operate multi-day meal issuance, parent or 
guardian pick-up, or bulk meal component non-congregate meal service 
must have a system in place to ensure that the proper number of meals 
are distributed to each eligible child. USDA expects that 378 non-
profit institutions and camps will ensure that a system is in place 
annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 1,892 hours and 378 responses to 
the collection.
    USDA estimates that 125 local government sponsors will be required 
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(i)(3) that sponsors 
electing to serve bulk meal components must ensure that required food 
components for each reimbursable meal are served, as described in 
paragraph (d) of 7 CFR 225.16, USDA estimates that the 125 local 
government sponsors will have procedures in place to ensure that bulk 
meal components meal service meets the requirements annually and that 
it takes approximately 2 hours to complete the requirement, which is 
estimated to add 251 annual burden hours and 125 responses to the 
collection.
Households
    The changes in this rule will add new reporting requirements to 
those currently approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0280 for 
Households.
    USDA estimates that 10,685 households will be required to fulfill 
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(6) that households provide 
written consent to participate in the Program at a rural site that 
utilizes the home delivery option. USDA estimates that 10,685 
households will have to provide their written consent to participate 
annually and that it takes approximately 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 2,671 hours and 
10,685 responses to the collection.
    USDA expects that 10,685 households will be required to fulfill the 
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(i)(2) that households travel to the 
parent or guardian pick-up site to take meals home to their children. 
USDA expects that the 10,685 households will travel to the pick-up site 
11 times annually for a total of 117,539 responses and that it takes 
approximately 2 hours to complete the requirement, which is estimated 
to add 235,078 annual burden hours and 117,539 responses to this 
collection.

Public Disclosure

State/Local/Tribal Governments

    The changes in this rule will add a new public disclosure 
requirement to those currently approved under OMB Control Number 0584-
0280 for State/Local/Tribal Governments.
    USDA estimates 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.3(e)(4) that State agencies must make 
their service coordination plans available to the public through a 
website, or through similar means. USDA estimates that the 53 State 
agencies will have to make their State coordination plans publicly 
available annually and that it takes approximately 15 minutes (0.25 
hours) to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 13 hours 
and 53 responses to the collection.

Businesses (Non-Profit Institutions and Camps)

    The changes in this rule will add a new public disclosure 
requirement to those currently approved under OMB Control Number 0584-
0280 for Businesses (Non-profit institutions and camps).
    USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be 
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(e) that each 
sponsor of sites that use free meal applications to determine 
individual eligibility must include certain information as a part of 
its notification to enrolled children. USDA estimates that the 2,210 
non-profit institutions and camps will be required to provide the 
information as a part of its notification to 26 enrolled children 
annually for a total of 58,365 responses and that it takes 
approximately 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to complete the requirement, 
which is estimated to add 14,591 annual burden hours and 58,365 
responses the collection.
    As a result of what's outlined in this rulemaking, USDA estimates 
that this information collection will have 63,942 respondents, 
12,505,697 responses, and 3,120,966 burden hours. The average burden 
per response and the annual burden hours are explained below and 
summarized in the charts which follow. Once the ICR for the final rule 
is approved USDA estimates that the burden for OMB Control Number 0584-
0280 will increase by 12,113,902 responses and 2,658,267 burden hours.
    For SFSP, there is a wide variation in development and 
administration costs to implement information systems to accommodate 
the FNS-905 requirements. USDA estimates a cost of $14,542.96 per State 
agency to perform the necessary system upgrades for respondents of this 
interim rule ICR. Likewise, program operators will face increased costs 
to offer home delivered meals as a part of this interim final rule ICR. 
USDA estimates a cost of $2,924.12 for each local government sponsor 
and a cost of $2,925.01 for each non-profit institution and camp to 
cover mailing costs associated with providing home delivery. Therefore, 
as a result of the interim final rule, USDA estimates that this 
collection is expected to have $770,777 in system upgrade costs, 
$1,657,978.25 in local government sponsor mailing costs, and 
$1,105,652.54 in non-profit institution and camp mailing costs, which 
will add a total of $3,534,407.79 in combined

[[Page 90290]]

system upgrades and annual mailing costs to the currently approved 
burden for SFSP under OMB Control Number 0584-0280 to the currently 
approved burden for OMB Control Number 0584-0280.

Reporting

    Respondents (Affected Public): Individual/households; businesses; 
and State, local, and Tribal government. The respondent groups 
identified include households, non-profit institutions and camps, and 
State/local/Tribal governments.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 26,948 respondents.
    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 454 responses.
    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 12,238,098 responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 0.23 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 2,770,008 hours.

Public Disclosure

    Respondents (Affected Public): Businesses and State, local, and 
Tribal government. The respondent groups identified include State 
agencies and non-profit institutions and camps.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,263 respondents.
    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 26 responses.
    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 58,418 responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 0.25 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 14,605 hours.
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P

[[Page 90291]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.003


[[Page 90292]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.004


[[Page 90293]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.005


[[Page 90294]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.006


[[Page 90295]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.007


[[Page 90296]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.008


[[Page 90297]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.009


[[Page 90298]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.010


[[Page 90299]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.011


[[Page 90300]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.012


[[Page 90301]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.013


[[Page 90302]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.014


[[Page 90303]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.015


[[Page 90304]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.016


[[Page 90305]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.017


[[Page 90306]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.018


[[Page 90307]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.019


[[Page 90308]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.020


[[Page 90309]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.021

BILLING CODE 3410-30-C

[[Page 90310]]



                            Summary of Burden
                            [OMB #0584-0280]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total No. Respondents......................................       63,942
Average No. Responses per Respondent.......................          196
Total Annual Responses.....................................   12,505,697
Average Hours per Response.................................         0.25
Total Burden Hours.........................................    3,120,966
Current OMB Approved Burden Hours..........................      462,699
Adjustments................................................            0
Program Changes............................................    2,658,267
Total Difference in Burden.................................    2,658,267
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: 7 CFR part 292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer 
EBT) Program.
    Form Number: FNS-366(a), approved in OMB Control #0584-0594, 
expiration date, September 30th, 2026; FNS-388, approved in OMB Control 
#0584-0594, expiration date, September 30th, 2026; and SF-778, approved 
in OMB Control #0584-0594, expiration date, September 30th, 2026. Forms 
included to capture burden specific to this rule that is not captured 
in OMB Control Number 0584-0594.
    OMB Control Number: 0584-NEW.
    Expiration Date: Not Yet Determined.
    Type of Request: New.
    Abstract: FNS is requesting a new OMB Control Number for the 
information collection requirements and associated burden for the 
Summer EBT program which is being implemented as a result of this 
interim final rule. Below is a summary of the changes in the rule and 
the accompanying reporting, recordkeeping, and public disclosure 
requirements that will impact the burden on Summer EBT Agencies (State 
agencies and Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs)), the Commonwealth of 
Puerto Rico, local government agencies, Summer EBT authorized retailers 
(firms and retail food stores), and participating households.
    The interim final rule will codify provisions of the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 2023 that establish a permanent, nationwide 
Summer EBT Program, beginning in 2024. The Summer EBT program will 
provide benefits on EBT cards for families to purchase food for their 
children, during the summer months, when school is not in session.
    The interim final rule will create a new chapter in 7 CFR part 292 
to establish the Summer EBT Program and the required procedures to 
fully implement the Program. This rulemaking will introduce new 
reporting, recordkeeping, and public disclosure requirements to ensure 
State agencies and Indian Tribal Organization (ITO) operations are 
compliant with the NSLA and the regulations. New requirements include 
State agency responsibilities, new eligibility and benefit issuance 
requirements, and the development of standards and monitoring 
requirements to ensure that eligible children receive the proper 
benefit and protect program integrity. The interim final rule will 
create new reporting and recordkeeping responsibilities that Summer EBT 
authorized retailers must comply with in order to redeem Summer EBT 
benefits spent at their locations. As a part of this rulemaking, some 
households will be required to submit an income eligibility, notify the 
appropriate Summer EBT agency for opting-out of Program participation 
or seeking an appeal of a Summer EBT decision, and respond to a Summer 
EBT agency's request for verification their Program eligibility to 
participate in the Program.

Reporting

Summer EBT Agencies (State Agencies, Indian Tribal Organizations, and 
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico)

    The changes in this rule will establish new reporting requirements, 
as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-NEW 7 CFR part 
292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) Program for 
State/Local/Tribal governments.
    USDA estimates that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(b)(1) that State agencies that have been 
approved to administer the Program must enter into a written agreement 
with FNS for the administration of the Program in the State (this is 
known as the Federal/State agreement). USDA estimates that the 55 State 
agencies will be required to enter into a Program agreement annually, 
and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 55 annual burden hours and responses into the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(e) that if the State has designated 
partnering agencies to provide support services to the Program, State 
agencies designated as the Summer EBT Coordinating Agency in their 
State must enter into a written agreement with partnering Summer EBT 
agencies that defines the roles and responsibilities of each (known as 
an inter-agency agreement). USDA expects that 55 State agencies will be 
required to enter into an inter-agency agreement annually, and that it 
takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 55 annual burden hours and responses into the 
inventory.
    USDA estimates that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(f)(2) that the State agency may submit a 
request for a waiver under paragraph (f)(1) of 7 CFR 292.3. USDA 
estimates that the 55 State agencies will submit a request for a waiver 
annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 55 annual burden hours and 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(f)(3) that State agencies may submit a 
request to waive specific statutory or regulatory requirements on 
behalf of eligible service providers that operate in the State. USDA 
expects that the 55 State agencies will submit a waiver request on 
behalf of 757 eligible service providers annually and that it takes 
approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add 41,635 annual burden hours and responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(f)(4) that State agencies must review 
any waiver request submitted by an eligible service provider and 
promptly forward approved requests to the appropriate FNSRO. USDA 
estimates that the 55 State agencies will review 757 waiver requests 
annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 41,635 annual burden hours and 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(f)(4)(v) that the State agency must notify 
the requesting eligible service provider that the request is denied and 
state the reason for denying the request in writing within 30 calendar 
days of the receipt of the request. USDA expects that the 55 State 
agencies will notify 757 eligible service providers annually and that 
it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 41,635 annual burden hours and responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organizations will be 
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(h)(3) that Indian 
Tribal Organizations must provide compelling justification for the 
waiver request in terms of how the waiver will improve the efficiency 
and effectiveness of the administration of the Program. USDA estimates 
that the 102 Indian Tribal

[[Page 90311]]

Organizations will provide justification for a waiver request annually 
and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 102 annual burden hours and responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(a) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must, by August 15th of each fiscal 
year, submit to the appropriate FNS Regional Office (FNSRO) of its 
intent to administer the Summer EBT Program. USDA expects that the 157 
Summer EBT agencies will be required to submit its intent to administer 
the Program annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 
hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 13 
annual burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(a) that, for 2024, State and 
Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must submit to the FNSRO 
its intent to administer the Summer EBT Program by January 1, 2024. 
USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
submit its intent to operate the Program annually and that it takes 
approximately 5 minutes (0,08 hours) to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 13 annual burden hours and 157 responses to 
the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(a) that, for 2024, State and 
Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must submit an interim 
Plan for Operations and Management that must include the programmatic 
information required in Sec.  292.8(e) and (f). USDA expects that the 
157 Summer EBT agencies will submit an interim Plan for Operations and 
Management annually and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete 
this requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and 
157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(b)(1) that, no later than 
February 15th of each year, the State and Indian Tribal Organization 
Summer EBT agencies must submit to the FNSRO a final Plan for 
Operations and Management that addresses all the requirements of Sec.  
292.8(e) and (f), for the Summer EBT Program for that fiscal year if 
the State has elected to participate in the Program. USDA estimates 
that the 157 Summer EBT agencies must submit a final Plan for 
Operations and Management annually and that it takes approximately 4 
hours to complete this requirement; which is estimated to add 628 
annual burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(d) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies may amend an interim or final Plan for 
Operations and Management to reflect changes and must submit the 
amendments to USDA for approval. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT 
agencies will submit an amendment annually and that it takes 
approximately 2 hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add 314 annual burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(e) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must include their final Plan for 
Operation and Management, which includes all of the required 
agreements, plans, procedures, and other documentation. USDA estimates 
that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will include the required documents as 
a part of their final Plan for Operations and Management annually and 
that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete this requirement, which 
is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and 157 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(e)(3) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must submit an administrative 
budget on behalf of the entire Program as part of the Plan for 
Operations and Management, using the FNS-366A Form. USDA expects that 
the 157 Summer EBT agencies will submit an FNS-366a form annually, and 
that it takes approximately 12 hours and 49 minutes (12.82 hours) to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 2,012 annual 
burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(e)(3) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must submit an amended 
expenditure plan should administrative fund needs change. USDA 
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will submit amendments 
annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 314 annual burden hours and 157 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organizations will be 
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(f) that Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must also include the required 
plans, descriptions, lists, and other documentation as part of their 
final Plan for Operations and Management. USDA estimates that the 102 
Indian Tribal Organizations will submit the required information 
annually and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 408 annual burden hours and 102 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill the 
requirement at 7 CFR 292.9(b) that State agencies and Indian Tribal 
Organizations serving the same geographic areas must enter into a 
written agreement to ensure the coordination of Summer EBT program 
services. USDA expects that the 55 State agencies will enter into 
approximately 1.85 agreements with an ITO annually and that it takes 
approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add 102 burden hours and responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organizations will be 
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.9(b) that State 
agencies and Indian Tribal Organizations serving the same geographic 
areas must enter into a written agreement to ensure the coordination of 
Summer EBT program services. USDA estimates that the 102 Indian Tribal 
Organizations will enter into approximately 0.54 agreements with the 
State agency annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to 55 burden hours and 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.10(a) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish, and update annually as 
needed, a plan to coordinate the statewide availability of services 
offered through the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) and Summer EBT 
Program. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will establish 
and update a coordinated services plan annually and that it takes 
approximately 5 hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add 785 burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be required 
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(b) that

[[Page 90312]]

State Summer EBT agencies must acquire Information Systems (IS) 
equipment or services to be utilized in an EBT system and adhere to the 
ADP process. USDA estimates that the 55 State Summer EBT agencies will 
be required to acquire IS equipment or services annually and that it 
takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement. Furthermore, 
USDA estimates that the 55 State Summer EBT agencies will face a total 
of $73,317,942 in start-up costs and $25,760,358 in ongoing operation 
and maintenance costs related to this requirement. USDA estimates that 
this will add 550 annual burden hours, 55 responses, and $99,078,300 in 
total costs to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(b)(4)(i) that State Summer EBT 
agencies must submit a new Planning APD, Implementation APD, and 
Testing documents to FNS for approval of IS projects. USDA expects that 
the 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be required to submit a new 
Planning APD, Implementation APD, and Testing documents to FNS annually 
and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 550 annual burden hours and 55 responses to 
the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be required 
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(b)(4)(ii) that State Summer 
EBT agencies must submit an Annual APD to FNS 60 days prior to the 
expiration of the Federal Financial Participation (FFP) approval for 
the initial implementation of Summer EBT and subsequent significant 
project changes. USDA estimates that the 55 State Summer EBT agencies 
will be required to submit annual Planning APD to FNS annually and that 
it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 110 annual burden hours and 55 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(g) that State Summer EBT 
agencies must execute service agreements when IS services are to be 
provided by a State central IT facility or another State or local 
agency. USDA expects that the 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be 
required to execute a service agreement annually and that it takes 
approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add 55 annual burden hours and responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(q)(2) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must implement and maintain a 
comprehensive Security Program for IS and installations involved in the 
administration of Summer EBT. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT 
agencies will be required to implement and maintain a comprehensive 
Security Program annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual 
burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(q)(3) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer State agencies must establish and maintain a 
program for conducting periodic risk analysis to ensure that 
appropriate, cost-effective safeguards are incorporated into the new 
and existing system. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will 
be required to establish and maintain a program for conducting periodic 
risk analysis annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual 
burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirements at 7 CFR 292.11(q)(4) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must review the security of IS 
involved in the administration of Summer EBT on a biennial basis. USDA 
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to review 
the security of IS systems twice annually and that it takes 
approximately 2 hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add 628 annual burden hours and 314 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 102 Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT 
agencies will be required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(r) 
that Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must acquire IS 
equipment or services to be utilized in an EBT system and adhere to the 
ADP process. USDA expects that the 102 Indian Tribal Organization 
Summer EBT agencies will acquire IS equipment or services annually and 
that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement. 
Furthermore, USDA estimates that the 102 Indian Tribal Organization 
Summer EBT agencies will face a total of $136,018,290 in start-up costs 
and $47,790,210 in ongoing operation and maintenance costs to complete 
the requirement. USDA estimates that this requirement adds 1,020 annual 
burden hours, 102 responses, and $183,808,500 in total costs to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 102 Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT 
agencies will be required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 
292.11(s)(1) that ITO Summer EBT agencies must follow the Department 
APD requirements and submit Planning and Implementation APDs and 
appropriate updates. USDA expects that the 102 ITO EBT Coordinating 
agencies will submit Planning and Implementation APDs annually and that 
it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 1,020 burden hours and 102 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT 
agencies will be required to follow the requirements at 7 CFR 
292.11(s)(3) that Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must 
submit EBT project status reports annually as a part of the State plan. 
USDA estimates that the 102 State Summer EBT agencies will submit a EBT 
project status report annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours 
to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 204 burden 
hours and 102 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(b)(1) that Summer EBT agencies 
must establish procedures to ensure correct eligibility determinations. 
USDA expects that the 157 State and Indian Tribal Organization Summer 
EBT agencies will each develop a process to determine eligibility 
annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this 
reporting requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual burden 
hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(b)(2) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish procedures that 
allow households to provide updated contact information for the purpose 
of receiving Summer EBT benefits. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer 
EBT agencies will each develop a process to update contact information 
annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual burden hours and 
157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(b)(3) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies

[[Page 90313]]

must establish procedures that allow eligible households to opt out of 
participation in the Program. USDA estimates that the 157 State and 
Summer EBT agencies must establish procedures annually and that it 
takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 1,570 annual burden hours and 157 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(c) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish and maintain a State/
ITO wide database of all children in NSLP/SBP participating schools 
within the State or ITO service area for the purposes of enrolling 
children for Summer EBT benefits and preventing duplicate benefit 
issuance. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will establish 
and maintain a State/ITO wide database annually and that it takes 
approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement. Furthermore, USDA 
estimates that the 157 State and Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT 
agencies will face a total of $207,325,800 in start-up costs and 
$72,755,100 in ongoing operation and maintenance costs for this 
requirement. USDA estimates that a total of 1,570 annual burden hours, 
157 responses, and $280,080,900 in costs will be added to the 
inventory.
    USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT 
agencies will be required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(c) 
that Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies may submit for USDA 
approval alternate plans to enroll children for Summer EBT benefits and 
detect and prevent duplicate benefit issuance, if an ITO determines 
that establishing and maintaining a database is not feasible or is 
unnecessary. USDA estimates that the 102 Indian Tribal Organization 
Summer EBT agencies will submit for approval an alternate plan annually 
and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 1,020 annual burden hours and 102 responses 
to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(d) that Summer EBT agencies 
must use streamlined certification to automatically enroll, without 
further application, each eligible child without regard to whether the 
child has been matched against an NSLP/SBP enrollment list. USDA 
expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each automatically enroll 
66,304 eligible children annually and that it takes approximately 5 
minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement; which is estimated 
to add 869,212 annual burden hours and 10,409,726 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT 
agencies will be required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 
292.12(d)(4) that Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies may 
submit for USDA approval alternate plans to efficiently enroll children 
with minimal burden for households if it determines that any element of 
automatic enrollment with Streamlined Certification is not feasible or 
is unnecessary. USDA estimates that the 102 Indian Tribal Organization 
Summer EBT agencies will submit an alternate plan annually and that it 
takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 1,020 annual burden hours and 102 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(e) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must make an application available to 
children who attend NSLP/SBP participating schools not already 
identified through streamlined certification and enroll them after 
matching against the statewide eligibility database. USDA estimates 
that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each enroll 91,185 eligible 
children annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 
hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 
1,195,387 annual burden hours and 14,316,012 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(e)(2) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must match children on 
applications submitted directly to a Summer EBT agency against the 
statewide eligibility database, as required in Sec.  292.12(c) prior to 
benefit issuance. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will 
each match 91,185 eligible children annually and that it takes 
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 1,195,387 annual burden hours and 14,316,012 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(f)(1) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must notify the household that 
filed an income application of their children's eligibility within 15 
operating days of receiving the application from the household. USDA 
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will send 91,185 
notifications annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute (0.02 
hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 239,077 
annual burden hours and 14,316,012 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(f)(2) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must notify households that 
their children are eligible for Summer EBT and that no application is 
required. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each 
notify 66,304 eligible households annually and that it takes 
approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) to complete this requirement, which 
is estimated to add 173,842 annual burden hours and 10,409,726 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(g) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must notify households that submitted 
an incomplete application or does not meet the eligibility requirements 
for Summer EBT benefits that their application has been denied, the 
reason for the denial, the notification of the right to appeal, 
instructions on how to appeal, and a statement reminding households 
that they may reapply for benefits at any time. USDA estimates that the 
157 Summer EBT agencies will each notify 4,559 households annually and 
that it takes approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 11,954 annual burden hours and 
715,801 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(h) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must receive a request for an appeal 
by households that submitted a denied application and promptly schedule 
a fair hearing upon request. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT 
agencies will each receive 4,559 requests annually and that it takes 
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 59,769 annual burden hours and 715,801 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(h) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide a conference to a 
household upon request to provide the opportunity for the household to 
discuss the situation,

[[Page 90314]]

present information, and obtain an explanation of the data submitted in 
the application or the decision rendered. USDA estimates that the 157 
Summer EBT agencies will provide 4,559 conferences annually and that it 
takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 715,801 annual burden hours and responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.13(a) that, by 2025, State and 
Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must develop a Summer 
EBT application to make available to households whose children attend 
NSLP/SBP participating schools, and who do not already have an 
individual eligibility determination. USDA expects that the 157 Summer 
EBT agencies will each develop an application annually and that it 
takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 1,570 annual burden hours and 157 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.13(h) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies may establish a system for executing 
household applications electronically and using electronic signatures. 
USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will establish a system 
for executing household applications electronically annually and that 
it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement. 
Furthermore, USDA estimates that the 157 State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies will face a total of $207,325,800 in 
start-up costs and $72,755,100 in ongoing operation and maintenance 
costs to complete the requirement. USDA estimates that this requirement 
adds a total of 1,570 annual burden hours, 157 responses, and 
$280,080,900 in total costs to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement 7 CFR 292.14(a)(1) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must verify questionable applications, 
on a case-by-case basis. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies 
will verify 531 applications and that it takes approximately 1 hour to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 83,311 burden 
hours and responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(a)(2) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies may verify an application for 
cause at any time during the instructional year or summer operational 
period, but verification must be completed within 30 days of receipt of 
the application. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will 
verify 531 applications for cause and that it takes approximately 1 
hour to complete this requirement; which is estimated to add 83,311 
burden hours and responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(a)(3) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must verify eligibility of 
children in a sample of household Summer EBT applications approved for 
benefits for the summer. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT 
agencies will sample 3,011 applications and that it takes approximately 
1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 472,766 
burden hours and responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(f)(2) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide written 
notification to households that their application has been selected for 
verification. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each 
notify 531 households annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute 
(0.02 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 
1,391 annual burden hours and 83,311 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(f)(6) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must make at least two 
attempts, at least one week apart, to contact any household that does 
not respond to a verification request. USDA expects that the 157 Summer 
EBT agencies will make 1,134 attempts to follow-up on verification 
requests annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete 
this requirement, which is estimated to add 356,076 annual burden hours 
and 178,038 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(f)(7) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organizations Summer EBT agencies must provide written 
notification to households of any reduction or termination of benefits 
as a result of verification. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT 
agencies will each notify 531 households annually and that it takes 
approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) to complete this requirement, which 
is estimated to add 1,391 annual burden hours and 83,311 responses to 
the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(c)(1)(i) that State and ITO 
Summer EBT agencies are responsible for the timely and accurate 
issuance of benefits to certified eligible children. USDA expects that 
the 157 Summer EBT agencies will issue benefits to 157,489 eligible 
children annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) 
to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 412,920 annual 
burden hours and 24,725,737 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(f)(2)(ii) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish an availability 
date for household access to their benefits and inform households of 
this date. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will 
establish an availability date annually and that it takes approximately 
1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 157 
annual burden hours and responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(g)(1) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies provide written training 
materials to each household prior to or at Summer EBT issuance. USDA 
expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will issue training materials 
to 157,489 households annually and that it takes approximately 5 
minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add 2,064,599 annual burden hours and 24,725,737 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(g)(4) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide replacement EBT 
cards available for pickup or place the card in the mail within two 
businesses days following notification by the household to the State 
agency that the card has been lost, stolen, or damaged and report 
issuance. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will issue 
replacement benefits to 40 households annually and that it takes 
approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) to complete this requirement, which 
is estimated to add

[[Page 90315]]

104 annual burden hours and 6,227 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(g)(5) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide replacement EBT 
benefits to households whose benefits were stolen or who lost Summer 
EBT benefits as a result of a natural disaster. USDA expects that the 
157 Summer EBT agencies will issue replacement benefits to 40 
households annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute (0.02 
hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 104 
annual burden hours and 6,227 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(h)(1)(ii) that Summer EBT 
agencies must provide notice, no less than 30 calendar days before 
benefit expungement is expected to begin, to households that their 
Summer EBT benefits are approaching expungement due to nonuse/
inactivity. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will notify 
11,812 households annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute 
(0.02 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 
30,969 annual burden hours and 1,854,430 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(h)(2) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish procedures to 
permit the appropriate managers to adjust Summer EBT benefits that have 
already been posted to an EBT account prior to the household accessing 
the account, or to remove benefits from inactive accounts for 
expungement. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies establish 
procedures annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual 
burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(h)(2)(ii) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must produce issuance reports 
that reflect the adjustment made to the Summer EBT agency issuance 
totals to comply with the reporting requirements in Sec.  292.23. USDA 
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will produce 11,812 issuance 
reports annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) 
to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 154,845 annual 
burden hours and 1,854,430 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.16(a) that State agencies must establish 
issuance and accountability systems as defined in Sec.  274.1. USDA 
estimates that the 55 State agencies will establish issuance and 
accountability systems annually and that it takes approximately 10 
hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 550 
annual burden hours and 55 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico will be required 
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.18 that the Commonwealth of 
Puerto Rico is authorized to establish issuance and accountability 
systems which ensure that only certified eligible households receive 
Summer EBT benefits. USDA expects that the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico 
will establish issuance and accountability systems annually and that it 
takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 10 annual burden hours and 1 response to the 
collection.
    USDA estimates that 102 ITOs will be required to fulfill the 
requirement at 7 CFR 292.19(c) that ITOs must create a system that 
ensures effective vendor integrity in accordance to specification. USDA 
estimates that the 102 ITOs will establish a system annually and that 
it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 1,020 annual burden hours and 102 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.21(b)(4) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT Agencies must provide for effective 
control and accountability by the Summer EBT agency for all Program 
funds, property, and other assets acquired with Program funds. USDA 
expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will provide for effective 
control and accountability for all Program funds, property, and other 
assets annually and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete 
this requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and 
157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.21(b)(5) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must complete an Automated 
Standard Application for Payment (ASAP) setup form so that FNS may set 
up a Letter of Credit by which Summer EBT funds will be made available. 
USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each submit an 
ASAP form annually and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete 
this requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and 
157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.21(b)(6) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide for controls which 
minimize the time between the receipt of Federal Funds from the United 
States Treasury and their disbursement for Program costs. USDA expects 
that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will provide controls annually and 
that it takes 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add 1,570 annual burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.21(b)(7) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide for procedures to 
determine the reasonableness, allowability, and allocability of costs 
in accordance with the applicable provisions prescribed in 2 CFR part 
200, subpart D, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 
and 415. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will provide 
for procedures annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual 
burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.21(b)(9) that the State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide for an audit trail 
including identification of time periods, initial and summary accounts, 
cost determination and allocation procedures, cost centers or other 
accounting procedures to support any costs claimed for Program 
administration. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will 
provide for an audit trail annually and that it takes approximately 10 
hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add of 1,570 
annual burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.22 that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must monitor and document compliance 
with Performance Standards I-IV. USDA

[[Page 90316]]

estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will document 3 compliance 
reviews and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 4,160 annual burden hours and 
416 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.23(d) that, for Summer EBT 
Administrative Grants, State and Indian Tribal Organizations Summer EBT 
agencies will be required to submit an expenditure plan by August 15th, 
prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. USDA expects that the 157 
Summer EBT agencies will submit an expenditure plan annually and that 
it takes 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 
157 annual burden hours and responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.23(e) that State Administrative 
Grant expenditures will be reported to FNS quarterly on a Summer EBT 
financial status report, using the FNS-778 Federal Financial Form. USDA 
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will report 4 Summer EBT 
financial status reports and that it takes 1 hour to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.23(f) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must report participation and issuance 
on a monthly basis using the FNS-388 Form. USDA expects that the 157 
Summer EBT agencies will submit 12 FNS-388 forms annually and that it 
takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 1,884 annual burden hours and responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.24(a) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies shall arrange for audits of their own 
operations to be conducted in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart 
F, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415. USDA 
expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will conduct an audit of their 
own operations and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and 157 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.24(b) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies shall provide FNS with the full 
opportunity to conduct management evaluations and financial management 
reviews of all operations of the SA or ITO. USDA estimates that the 157 
Summer EBT agencies will conduct an audit of their own operations 
annually and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and 157 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.25 that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies shall promptly investigate complaints 
received or irregularities noted in connection with the operation of 
the Program, and shall take appropriate action to correct any 
irregularities. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will 
review 121 complaints received or irregularities noted in connection 
with the operation of the Program annually and that it takes 4 hours to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 75,700 annual 
burden hours and 18,925 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(a) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish a fair hearing 
procedure that is applicable to the State or ITO program as a whole. 
USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will establish a process 
annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual burden hours and 
157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(b) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must produce oral or documentary 
evidence for a requested hearing. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT 
agencies will produce oral or documentary evidence for 4,559 hearings 
and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 2,863,202 annual burden hours and 715,801 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(b)(9) that a hearing official 
must transmit written notification to the Summer EBT agency and the 
household of the hearing official's decision. USDA expects that the 157 
Summer EBT agencies will notify 4,559 households and that it takes 
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 59,769 annual burden hours and 715,801 
responses to the inventory.

Local Government Agencies

    The changes in this rule will establish a new reporting 
requirement, as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0586-NEW 
7 CFR part 292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) 
Program for the local government agencies.
    USDA estimates that 757 local government agencies will be required 
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(f)(4) that eligible service 
providers may submit a request for a waiver under paragraph (f)(1) of 7 
CFR 292.3 in accordance with section 12(l) and the provisions of this 
part. USDA estimates that the 757 local government agencies will submit 
a waiver request annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 757 annual burden 
hours and responses to the inventory.

Businesses (Summer EBT Authorized Retailers)

    The changes in this rule will establish new reporting requirements, 
as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-NEW, 7 CFR part 
292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) Program for the 
Summer EBT Authorized Retailers.
    USDA estimates that 247,636 Summer EBT Authorized Retailers will be 
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.17(a) that firms shall 
submit claims in accordance to the standards for determination and 
disposition of claims described at Sec.  278.7. USDA estimates that the 
247,636 Summer EBT Authorized Retailers will submit a claim monthly (12 
claims annually) and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) 
to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 248,131 annual 
burden hours and 2,971,632 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 9,552 Summer EBT Authorized Retailers will be 
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.17(e) that firms 
aggrieved by administrative action may request an administrative review 
of the administrative action with FNS. USDA expects that the 9,552 
Summer EBT Authorized Retailers will submit a request annually and that 
it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 798 annual burden hours and 
9,552 responses to the inventory.

[[Page 90317]]

Households

    The changes in this rule will establish new reporting requirements, 
as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-NEW 7 CFR part 
292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) Program for the 
households.
    USDA estimates that 14,316,012 households will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(f)(1) that households not 
directly certified must submit an income application to determine 
eligibility for Summer EBT benefits. USDA estimates that the 14,316,012 
households will submit an application annually and that it takes 
approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add 14,316,012 annual burden hours and responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 2,132,112 households will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(f)(3) that households must notify the 
appropriate Summer EBT agency that they decline their Summer EBT 
benefits. USDA expects that the 2,132,112 households will notify the 
Summer EBT agency annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes 
(0.08 hours) to complete this requirement; which is estimated to add 
178,031 annual burden hours and 2,132,112 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 715,801 households will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(h) that households that received a 
notice of denial may seek an appeal in accordance to the procedures 
established by the Summer EBT agency or LEA. USDA estimates that the 
715,801 households will submit a request for appeal annually and that 
it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement; which is 
estimated to add 715,801 annual burden hours and responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 715,801 households will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(h) that households can request and 
participate for a conference to provide the opportunity for the 
household to discuss the situation, present information, and obtain an 
explanation of the data submitted in the application or the decision 
rendered. USDA expects that the 715, 801 households will request and 
participate in a conference annually and that it takes approximately 2 
hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,431,601 
annual burden hours and 715,801 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 83,311 households will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(f) that households selected and 
notified of their selection for verification must provide documentation 
of income or evidence of SNAP, FDPIR, or TANF participation. USDA 
estimates that the 83,311 households will notify the Summer EBT agency 
annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this 
requirement; which is estimated to add 166,623 annual burden hours and 
83,311 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 83,311 households will be required to fulfill the 
requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(f)(6) that households must respond to a 
follow-up attempt at verification by the Summer EBT agency. USDA 
expects that the 83,311 households will participate in a follow-up 
meeting annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete 
this requirement, which is estimated to add 166,623 annual burden hours 
and 83,311 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 57,874 households will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(a) that households can request for an 
appeal from a decision made with respect to the application the family 
has made for Summer EBT benefits. USDA estimates that the 57,874 
households will request for an appeal annually and that it takes 
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 4,833 annual burden hours and 57,874 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 57,874 households will be required to fulfill the 
requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(b)(5) that households may present oral or 
documentary evidence and arguments that support their position. USDA 
expects that the 57,874 households will present oral or documentary 
evidence and arguments before a hearing official annually and that it 
takes approximately 4 hours to complete this requirement, which is 
estimated to add 231,497 annual burden hours and 57,874 responses to 
the inventory.

Recordkeeping

State/Local/Tribal Governments

    The changes in this rule will establish new recordkeeping 
requirements, as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-
NEW, 7 CFR Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) Program for 
the State agencies and the Summer EBT agencies.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(c) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish and maintain a 
statewide database of eligible children that attend NLSP/SBP 
participating schools for the purposes of conducting streamlined 
certification. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will 
maintain records of 157,489 eligible children and that it takes 
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete the requirement, which 
is estimated to add 2,064,599 annual burden hours and 24,725,737 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(f)(3) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must document and maintain a 
record or any notification from a household declining Summer EBT 
benefits. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each 
maintain 32,257 records annually and that it takes approximately 5 
minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement; which is estimated 
to add a total of 422,870 annual burden hours and 5,064,308 responses 
to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(g) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must document and maintain a record of 
the reasons for an ineligibility determination for a written 
application. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each 
maintain 4,559 records annually and that it takes approximately 5 
minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated 
to add 59,769 annual burden hours and 715,801 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(h)(2)(i) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must document the date and 
amount of benefits in the household case file whenever benefits are 
expunged. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each 
document the date and amount of 145,677 records annually and that it 
takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 1,909,754 annual burden hours 
and 22,871,307 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 55 Summer agencies will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.16(h) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must maintain issuance, inventory, 
reconciliation, and other accountability records as described in Sec.  
274.5. USDA expects that the 55 State agencies will each maintain 12 
records annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) 
to complete this requirement, which is

[[Page 90318]]

estimated to add 55 annual burden hours and 660 responses to the 
inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.20(h) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must maintain Program records as 
necessary to support the administrative costs claimed and the reports 
submitted to FNS under this paragraph and ensure that such records are 
retained for a period of 3 years. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer 
EBT agencies will each maintain a record of administrative costs 
claimed and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 13 annual burden 
hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.22 that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must monitor and document the 
performance standards listed in this paragraph. USDA expects that the 
157 Summer EBT agencies will each maintain 1 record annually and that 
it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 13 annual burden hours and 157 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.23(b) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must retain records substantiating 
eligibility determinations on file for at least 3 years after the date 
of the submission of the final financial reports or until the audit 
findings have been resolved. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT 
agencies will each maintain 157,489 records annually and that it takes 
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, 
which is estimated to add 2,064,599 annual burden hours and 24,725,737 
responses to the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.25 that State and Indian Tribal 
Organizations Summer EBT agencies shall maintain on file all evidence 
relating to such investigations and corrective action procedures. USDA 
expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each maintain 121 records 
annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to 
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,580 annual 
burden hours and 18,925 responses to the inventory.
    USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(b)(11) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies shall preserve a written record 
of each hearing for a period of 3 years. USDA estimates that the 157 
Summer EBT agencies will each maintain 4,559 records annually and that 
it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this 
requirement, which is estimated to add 59,769 annual burden hours and 
715,801 responses to the inventory.

Businesses (Summer EBT Authorized Retailers)

    The changes in this rule will establish a new recordkeeping 
requirement, as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-NEW, 
7 CFR Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) Program for the 
Summer EBT Authorized Retailers.
    USDA expects that 2,428 Summer EBT Authorized Retailers will be 
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.19(c)(3) that retail 
food stores and wholesale food concerns shall submit claims in 
accordance to the standards for determination and disposition of claims 
described in Sec.  246.12. USDA expects that 2,428 firms will retain 12 
records of submitted claims and that it takes approximately 5 minutes 
(0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 
2,433 annual burden hours and 29,134 responses to the inventory.

Public Disclosure

    The changes in this rule will establish new public disclosure 
requirements, as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-
NEW, 7 CFR part 292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) 
Program for the Summer EBT agencies.

State/Local/Tribal Governments

    USDA estimates 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to fulfill 
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.10(d) that State and Indian Tribal 
Organization Summer EBT agencies must make their coordinated service 
plans available to the public through a website, or through similar 
means. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each make 
their coordinated service plans available to the public annually and 
that it takes 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to complete the requirement, 
which is estimated to add 39 annual burden hours and 157 responses to 
the inventory.
    USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to 
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(a)(1) that State and Indian 
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies shall inform participant and 
applicant households of their Program rights and responsibilities and 
that the materials meet the requirements. USDA expects that the 157 
Summer EBT agencies will each publicly disclose to 157,489 households 
annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) to 
complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 412,920 annual 
burden hours and 24,725,737 responses to the inventory.
    As a result of what's outlined in this rulemaking, FNS estimates 
that this new information collection will have 16,696,674 respondents, 
246,393,631 responses, and 35,748,275 burden hours. The average burden 
per response and the annual burden hours are explained below and 
summarized in the charts which follow. Once the ICR for the final rule 
is approved, FNS estimates that the burden for OMB Control Number 0584-
NEW 7 CFR part 292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) 
Program will increase OMB's information collection inventory by 
246,393,631 responses and 35,748,275 burden hours.
    For S-EBT, given the wide variation in information system 
development and maintenance costs across State and ITO Summer EBT 
agencies, USDA estimates a total program cost of $282,886,800 to 
acquire IS technology and perform system upgrades annually for the 
Advanced Planning Document (ADP) process described in this interim 
final rule ICR. Likewise, USDA estimates a total program cost of 
$280,080,900 to acquire and develop statewide NSLP/SBP databases per 
State and ITO Summer EBT agency and an additional cost of $280,080,900 
to develop and maintain a system that is capable of processing 
electronic applications for S-EBT. Therefore, as a result of what's 
outlined in this final rule, USDA estimates that this collection is 
expected to have $628,260,000 in start-up costs related to system 
upgrades, and an additional $220,740,000 in ongoing operation and 
maintenance costs. USDA estimates that a total of $849,000,000 in 
combined start-up costs and ongoing operation and maintenance costs 
will be added to the inventory.

Reporting

    Respondents (Affected Public): Individual/households; businesses; 
and State, local, and Tribal government. The respondent groups 
identified include households, Summer EBT Authorized Retailers (firms), 
State agencies, ITOs, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Summer

[[Page 90319]]

EBT agencies, and local government agencies.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 16,696,674 respondents.
    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 9 responses.
    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 142,800,013 responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 0.2 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 28,749,862 hours.

Recordkeeping

    Respondents (Affected Public): Businesses; and State, local, and 
Tribal government. The respondent groups identified include Summer EBT 
Authorized Retailers (retail food stores), State agencies and Summer 
EBT agencies.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,585 respondents.
    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 30,512 responses.
    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 78,867,723 responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 0.08 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 6,585,455 hours.

Public Disclosure

    Respondents (Affected Public): State, local, and Tribal government. 
The respondent groups identified include State and ITO Summer EBT 
agencies.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 157 respondents.
    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 157,49013 responses.
    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 24,725,894 responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 0.02 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 412,959 hours.
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P

[[Page 90320]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.022


[[Page 90321]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.023


[[Page 90322]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.024


[[Page 90323]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.025


[[Page 90324]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.026


[[Page 90325]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.027


[[Page 90326]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.028


[[Page 90327]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.029


[[Page 90328]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.030


[[Page 90329]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.031


[[Page 90330]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.032


[[Page 90331]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.033


[[Page 90332]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.034


[[Page 90333]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.035


[[Page 90334]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.036


[[Page 90335]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.037


[[Page 90336]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.038


[[Page 90337]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.039


[[Page 90338]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.040


[[Page 90339]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.041


[[Page 90340]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.042


[[Page 90341]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.043


[[Page 90342]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.044


[[Page 90343]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.045


[[Page 90344]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.046


[[Page 90345]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.047


[[Page 90346]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.048

BILLING CODE 3410-30-C

[[Page 90347]]



                            Summary of Burden
                             [OMB #0584-NEW]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total No. Respondents......................................   16,696,674
Average No. Responses per Respondent.......................           15
Total Annual Responses.....................................  246,393,631
Average Hours per Response.................................        0.145
Total Burden Hours.........................................   35,748,276
Current OMB Approved Burden Hours..........................            0
Adjustments................................................            0
Program Changes............................................   35,748,276
Total Difference in Burden.................................   35,748,276
------------------------------------------------------------------------

E-Government Act Compliance

    USDA is committed to the E-Government Act, which requires 
Government agencies in general to provide the public the option of 
submitting information or transacting business electronically to the 
maximum extent possible. An electronic copy of this interim final rule 
will be made available through the agency's website.

List of Subjects

7 CFR Part 210

    Children, Commodity School Program, Food assistance programs, 
Grants programs--social programs, National School Lunch Program, 
Nutrition, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surplus 
agricultural commodities.

7 CFR Part 220

    Grant programs--education, Grant programs--health, Infants and 
children, Nutrition, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, School 
breakfast and lunch programs.

7 CFR Part 225

    Food assistance programs, Grant programs--health, Infants and 
children, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

7 CFR Part 292

    Administrative practice and procedure, Agriculture, Food assistance 
programs, Grant programs--education, Grant programs--health, Infants 
and children, Nutrition, Public Assistance Programs, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, School breakfast and lunch programs, 
Supplemental Assistance Programs.
    Accordingly, 7 CFR chapter II is amended as follows:

PART 210--NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM

0
1. The authority citation for part 210 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1751-1760, 1779.


0
2. In Sec.  210.2, add in alphabetical order a definition for 
``Seamless Summer Option'' to read as follows:


Sec.  210.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Seamless Summer Option means the meal service alternative 
authorized by section 13(a)(8) of the Richard B. Russell National 
School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(8), under which public or nonprofit 
school food authorities participating in the National School Lunch 
Program or School Breakfast Program offer meals at no cost to children 
during the traditional summer vacation periods and, for year-round 
schools, vacation periods longer than 10 school days.
* * * * *

0
3. In Sec.  210.18, amend paragraph (e)(3)(ii) as follows:
0
a. Remove the period at the end of the first sentence and add in its 
place ``and only operates congregate meal service.''; and
0
b. Add two sentences following the first sentence.
    The addition reads as follows:


Sec.  210.18  Administrative reviews.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) * * * If the school food authority operates congregate and 
non-congregate meal service, a minimum of two sites must be reviewed, 
one congregate site and one non-congregate site. If the school food 
authority has one site that operates both congregate and non-congregate 
meal services, the State agency may review a minimum of one site and 
must observe both a congregate and non-congregate meal service at that 
one site. * * *
* * * * *

0
4. Add Sec.  210.34 to read as follows:


Sec.  210.34  Seamless Summer Option non-congregate meal service.

    A school food authority operating the Seamless Summer Option in a 
rural area may be approved to offer a non-congregate meal service 
consistent with that established in part 225 of this chapter. Such 
school food authorities must comply with the non-congregate meal 
service provisions set forth at Sec.  225.16(b)(5)(i) and (iv) of this 
chapter and may use the non-congregate meal service options contained 
in Sec.  225.16(i) of this chapter.

PART 220--SCHOOL BREAKFAST PROGRAM

0
5. The authority citation for part 220 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1773, 1779, unless otherwise noted.


0
6. In Sec.  220.2, add in alphabetical order a definition for 
``Seamless Summer Option'' to read as follows:


Sec.  220.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Seamless Summer Option means the meal service alternative 
authorized by section 13(a)(8) of the Richard B. Russell National 
School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(8), under which public or nonprofit 
school food authorities participating in the National School Lunch 
Program or School Breakfast Program offer meals at no cost to children 
during the traditional summer vacation periods and, for year-round 
schools, vacation periods longer than 10 school days.
* * * * *

0
7. Add Sec.  220.23 to read as follows:


Sec.  220.23  Seamless Summer Option non-congregate meal service.

    A school food authority participating in the National School Lunch 
Program's Seamless Summer Option, and which is approved to offer a non-
congregate meal service, must comply with the provisions specified in 
Sec.  210.34 of this chapter.

PART 225--SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM

0
8. The authority citation for part 225 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 9, 13 and 14, Richard B. Russell National 
School Lunch Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1758, 1761 and 1762a).


0
9. In Sec.  225.2:
0
a. Revise the definition for ``Children'';
0
b. Add in alphabetical order the definitions for ``Conditional non-
congregate site'', ``Congregate meal service'', and ``Good standing'';
0
c. Revise the definition for ``New site'';
0
d. Add in alphabetical order a definition for ``Non-congregate meal 
service''; and
0
e. Revise the definitions for ``Operating costs'', ``Rural'', ``Site'', 
and ``Site supervisor''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  225.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Children means:
    (1) Persons 18 years of age and under; and
    (2) Persons over 18 years of age who are determined by a State 
educational agency or a local public educational agency of a State to 
be mentally or

[[Page 90348]]

physically disabled and who participate in a public or nonprofit 
private school program established for the mentally or physically 
disabled.
* * * * *
    Conditional non-congregate site means a site which qualifies for 
Program participation because it conducts a non-congregate meal service 
for eligible children in an area that does not meet the definition of 
``areas in which poor economic conditions exist'' and is not a 
``Camp,'' as defined in this section.
    Congregate meal service means a food service at which meals that 
are provided to children are consumed on site in a supervised setting.
* * * * *
    Good standing means the status of a program operator that meets its 
Program responsibilities, is current with its financial obligations, 
and, if applicable, has fully implemented all corrective actions within 
the required period of time.
* * * * *
    New site means a site which did not participate in the Program in 
the prior year, an experienced site that is proposing to operate a non-
congregate meal service for the first time, or, as determined by the 
State agency, a site which has experienced significant staff turnover 
from the prior year.
* * * * *
    Non-congregate meal service means a food service at which meals are 
provided for children to consume all of the components off site. Non-
congregate meal service must only be operated at sites designated as 
``Rural'' with no ``Congregate meal service,'' as determined in Sec.  
225.6(h)(3) and (4).
* * * * *
    Operating costs means the cost of operating a food service under 
the Program:
    (1) Including the:
    (i) Cost of obtaining food;
    (ii) Labor directly involved in the preparation and service of 
food;
    (iii) Cost of nonfood supplies;
    (iv) Rental and use allowances for equipment and space; and
    (v) Cost of transporting children in rural areas to feeding sites 
in rural areas;
    (vi) Cost of delivering non-congregate meals in rural areas; but
    (2) Excluding:
    (i) The cost of the purchase of land, acquisition or construction 
of buildings;
    (ii) Alteration of existing buildings;
    (iii) Interest costs;
    (iv) The value of in-kind donations; and
    (v) Administrative costs.
* * * * *
    Rural means:
    (1) Any area in a county which is not a part of a Metropolitan 
Statistical Area based on the Office of Management and Budget's 
Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas;
    (2) Any area in a county classified as a non-metropolitan area 
based on USDA Economic Research Service's Rural-Urban Continuum Codes 
and Urban Influence Codes;
    (3) Any census tract classified as a non-metropolitan area based on 
USDA Economic Research Service's Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes;
    (4) Any area of a Metropolitan Statistical Area which is not part 
of a Census Bureau-defined urban area;
    (5) Any area of a State which is not part of an urban area as 
determined by the Secretary;
    (6) Any subsequent substitution or update of the aforementioned 
classification schemes that Federal governing bodies create; or
    (7) Any ``pocket'' within a Metropolitan Statistical Area which, at 
the option of the State agency and with FNSRO approval, is determined 
to be rural in character based on other data sources.
* * * * *
    Site means the place where a child receives a program meal. A site 
may be the indoor or outdoor location where congregate meals are 
served, a stop on a delivery route of a mobile congregate meal service, 
or the distribution location or route for a non-congregate meal 
service. However, a child's residence is not considered a non-
congregate meal site for Program monitoring purposes.
    Site supervisor means the individual who has been trained by the 
sponsor and is responsible for all administrative and management 
activities at the site, including, but not limited to: maintaining 
documentation of meal deliveries, ensuring that all meals served are 
safe, and maintaining accurate point of service meal counts. Except for 
non-congregate meal service sites using delivery services, the 
individual is on site for the duration of the food service.
* * * * *

0
10. In Sec.  225.3, revise paragraph (b) add paragraph (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  225.3  Administration.

* * * * *
    (b) State administered programs. Within the State, responsibility 
for the administration of the Program must be in the State agency. Each 
State agency must notify the Department by January 1 of the fiscal year 
regarding its intention to administer the Program. Each State agency 
desiring to take part in the Program must enter into a written 
agreement with FNS for the administration of the Program in accordance 
with the provisions of this part. The agreement must cover the 
operation of the Program during the period specified therein and may be 
extended by written consent of both parties. The agreement must contain 
an assurance that the State agency will comply with the Department's 
nondiscrimination regulations (7 CFR part 15) issued under title VI of 
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and any Instructions issued by FNS 
pursuant to 7 CFR part 15, title IX of the Education Amendments of 
1972, and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. However, if a 
State educational agency is not permitted by law to disburse funds to 
any of the nonpublic schools in the State, the Secretary must disburse 
the funds directly to such schools within the State for the same 
purposes and subject to the same conditions as the disbursements to 
public schools within the State by the State educational agency.
* * * * *
    (e) Coordinated Services Plan. (1) Each State agency must 
establish, and update annually as needed, a plan to coordinate the 
statewide availability of services offered through the Summer Food 
Service Program described in this part and the Summer Electronic 
Benefits Transfer (EBT) Program regulations (7 CFR part 292).
    (2) Only one plan must be established for each State in which both 
the Summer Food Service Program and the Summer EBT Program is 
administered. If more than one agency administers the Summer Food 
Service Program and Summer EBT within a respective State, they must 
work together to develop and implement the plan. States should also 
ensure that plans include the National School Lunch Program's Seamless 
Summer Program if appropriate.
    (3) The plan must include, at minimum, the following information:
    (i) A description of the roles and responsibilities of each State 
administering agency, and, as applicable, any other agencies, Indian 
Tribal Organizations, or public or private organizations which will be 
involved in administering the Programs;
    (ii) A description of how the State agency and any other 
organizations included in the plan will coordinate outreach and 
programmatic activities to maximize the reach of the Summer Food 
Service Program and Summer EBT Program;
    (iii) Metrics to assess Program reach and coverage; and

[[Page 90349]]

    (iv) The State agency's plans to partner with other Federal, State, 
Tribal, or local programs to aid participants in accessing all Federal, 
State, Tribal, or local programs for which they are eligible.
    (4) States must notify the public about their plan and make it 
available to the public through a website, and should, to the maximum 
extent practicable, solicit and consider input on plan development and 
implementation from other State, Tribal, and local agencies; 
organizations involved in the administration of nutrition and human 
services programs; participants; and other stakeholders.
    (5) States must consult with FNS on the development of and any 
significant subsequent updates to their plan. Initial Plans must be 
submitted to FNS no later than January 1, 2025. States must submit 
updates annually when significant changes are made to the plan, and 
otherwise no less than every 3 years.

0
11. In Sec.  225.4, revise paragraphs (d)(7) and (8) and add paragraphs 
(d)(9) and (10) to read as follows:


Sec.  225.4  Program management and administration plan.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (7) The State's plan for ensuring compliance with the food service 
management company procurement monitoring requirements set forth at 
Sec.  225.6(l);
    (8) An estimate of the State's need, if any, for monies available 
to pay for the cost of conducting health inspections and meal quality 
tests;
    (9) The State's plan to provide a reasonable opportunity for 
children to access meals across all areas of the State; and
    (10) The State's plan for Program delivery in areas that could 
benefit the most from the provision of non-congregate meals, including 
the State's plan to identify areas with no congregate meal service, and 
target priority areas for non-congregate meal service.

0
12. In Sec.  225.6:
0
a. Revise paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(6) and (8);
0
b. Add paragraph (b)(12);
0
c. Remove the word ``and'' at the end of the paragraph (c)(2)(ix);
0
d. Remove the period at the end of paragraph (c)(2)(x) and add in its 
place ``; and'';
0
e. Add paragraph (c)(2)(xi);
0
f. Remove the word ``and'' at the end of the paragraph (c)(3)(vi);
0
g. Remove the period at the end of paragraph (c)(3)(vii) and add in its 
place ``; and'';
0
h. Add paragraph (c)(3)(viii); and
0
i. Revise paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2) introductory text, and (g) through 
(i).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  225.6  State agency responsibilities.

    (a) * * *
    (2) By February 1 of each fiscal year, each State agency must 
announce the purpose, eligibility criteria, and availability of the 
Program throughout the State, through appropriate means of 
communication. As part of this effort, each State agency must:
    (i) Identify areas in which poor economic conditions exist to 
qualify for the Program and actively seek eligible applicant sponsors 
to serve:
    (A) Rural areas;
    (B) Indian Tribal territories; and
    (C) Areas with a concentration of migrant farm workers.
    (ii) The State agency must identify rural areas with no congregate 
meal service and encourage participating sponsors to provide non-
congregate meals to eligible children in those areas.
    (iii) The State agency must target outreach efforts to priority 
outreach areas.
    (iv) For approval of closed enrolled sites, the State agency must 
establish criteria to ensure that operation of a closed enrolled site 
does not limit Program access for eligible children in the area where 
the site is located.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (6) The State agency must not approve any sponsor to operate more 
than 200 sites or to serve more than an average of 50,000 children per 
day. However, the State agency may approve exceptions if:
    (i) The applicant demonstrates that it has the capability of 
managing a program larger than the limits in this paragraph (b)(6); and
    (ii) The State agency has the capacity to conduct reviews of at 
least 10 percent of the sponsor's sites, as described in Sec.  
225.7(e)(4)(v).
* * * * *
    (8) Applicants which qualify as camps and sponsors of conditional 
non-congregate sites must be approved for reimbursement only for meals 
served free to enrolled children who meet the Program's income 
standards.
* * * * *
    (12) The State agency must not deny a sponsor's application based 
solely on the sponsor's intent to provide a non-congregate meal 
service.
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (xi) Procedures that document meals are only distributed, to a 
reasonable extent, to eligible children and that duplicate meals are 
not distributed to any child, if the applicant sponsor is electing to 
use the non-congregate meal service options described in Sec.  
225.16(i)(1) and (2).
    (3) * * *
    (viii) Procedures that document meals are only distributed, to a 
reasonable extent, to eligible children and that duplicate meals are 
not distributed to any child, if the applicant sponsor is electing to 
use the non-congregate meal service options described in Sec.  
225.16(i)(1) and (2).
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) Nondiscrimination statement. (i) Each sponsor must submit a 
nondiscrimination statement of its policy for serving meals to 
children. The statement must consist of:
    (A) An assurance that all children are served the same meals and 
that there is no discrimination in the course of the food service; and
    (B) Except for camps and conditional non-congregate sites, a 
statement that the meals served are free at all sites.
    (ii) A school sponsor must submit the policy statement only once, 
with the initial application to participate as a sponsor. However, if 
there is a substantive change in the school's free and reduced price 
policy, a revised policy statement must be provided at the State 
agency's request.
    (iii) In addition to the information described in paragraph (i) of 
this section, the policy statement of all camps and conditional non-
congregate sites that charge separately for meals must also include:
    (A) A statement that the eligibility standards conform to the 
Secretary's family size and income standards for reduced price school 
meals;
    (B) A description of the method to be used in accepting 
applications from families for Program meals that ensures that 
households are permitted to apply on behalf of children who are members 
of households receiving SNAP, FDPIR, or TANF benefits using the 
categorical eligibility procedures described in Sec.  225.15(f);
    (C) A description of the method to be used for collecting payments 
from children who pay the full price of the meal while preventing the 
overt identification of children receiving a free meal;
    (D) An assurance that the sponsor will establish hearing procedures 
for families

[[Page 90350]]

requesting to appeal a denial of an application for free meals. These 
procedures must meet the requirements set forth in paragraph (f)(2) of 
this section;
    (E) An assurance that, if a family requests a hearing, the child 
will continue to receive free meals until a decision is rendered; and
    (F) An assurance that there will be no overt identification of free 
meal recipients and no discrimination against any child on the basis of 
race, color, national origin, sex (including gender identity and sexual 
orientation), age, or disability.
    (2) Hearing procedures statement. Each camp or sponsor of a 
conditional non-congregate site must submit a copy of its hearing 
procedures with its application. At a minimum, the procedures must 
provide that:
* * * * *
    (g) Site information sheet. The State agency must develop a site 
information sheet for sponsors.
    (1) New sites. The application submitted by sponsors must include a 
site information sheet for each site where a food service operation is 
proposed. Where a non-congregate meal service operation is proposed for 
the first time, the sponsor must follow the requirements of this 
paragraph (g)(1). At a minimum, the site information sheet must 
demonstrate or describe the following:
    (i) An organized and supervised system for serving meals to 
children;
    (ii) The estimated number of meals to be served, types of meals to 
be served, and meal service times;
    (iii) Whether the site is rural, as defined in Sec.  225.2, or non-
rural. Documentation supporting the rural designation is required. New 
documentation is required every 5 years, or earlier, if the State 
agency determines that an area's rural status has changed significantly 
since the last designation;
    (iv) Whether the meal service is congregate or non-congregate;
    (v) Whether the site is a self-preparation site or a vended site, 
as defined in Sec.  225.2;
    (vi) Arrangements for delivery and holding of meals until meal 
service times and storing and refrigerating any leftover meals until 
the next day, within standards prescribed by State or local health 
authorities;
    (vii) Access to a means of communication to make necessary 
adjustments in the number of meals delivered, based on changes in the 
number of children in attendance at each site;
    (viii) Arrangements for food service during periods of inclement 
weather;
    (ix) For open sites and restricted open sites:
    (A) Documentation supporting the eligibility of each site as 
serving an area in which poor economic conditions exist;
    (B) When school data are used, new documentation is required every 
5 years;
    (C) When census data are used, new documentation is required every 
5 years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's 
socioeconomic status has changed significantly since the last census; 
and
    (D) At the discretion of the State agency, sponsors proposing to 
serve an area affected by an unanticipated school closure may be exempt 
from submitting new site documentation if the sponsor has participated 
in the Program at any time during the current year or in either of the 
prior 2 calendar years;
    (x) For closed enrolled sites:
    (A) The projected number of children enrolled and the projected 
number of children eligible for free and reduced price school meals for 
each of these sites; or documentation supporting the eligibility of 
each site as serving an area in which poor economic conditions exist;
    (B) When school data are used, new documentation is required every 
5 years; and
    (C) When census data are used, new documentation is required every 
5 years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's 
socioeconomic status has changed significantly since the last census;
    (xi) For NYSP sites, certification from the sponsor that all of the 
children who will receive Program meals are enrolled participants in 
the NYSP;
    (xii) For camps, the number of children enrolled in each session 
who meet the Program's income standards. If such information is not 
available at the time of application, this information must be 
submitted as soon as possible thereafter, and in no case later than the 
filing of the camp's claim for reimbursement for each session;
    (xiii) For sites that will serve children of migrant workers:
    (A) Certification from a migrant organization, which attests that 
the site serves children of migrant workers; and
    (B) Certification from the sponsor that the site primarily serves 
children of migrant workers, if non-migrant children are also served; 
and
    (xiv) For conditional non-congregate sites, the number of children 
enrolled who meet the Program's income standards. If such information 
is not available at the time of application, this information must be 
submitted as soon as possible thereafter, and in no case later than the 
filing of the sponsor's claim for reimbursement.
    (2) Experienced sites. The application submitted by sponsors must 
include a site information sheet for each site where a food service 
operation is proposed. The State agency may require sponsors of 
experienced sites to provide information described in paragraph (g)(1) 
of this section. At a minimum, the site information sheet must 
demonstrate or describe the following:
    (i) The estimated number of meals, types of meals to be served, and 
meal service times;
    (ii) Whether the site is rural, as defined in Sec.  225.2, or non-
rural. Documentation supporting the rural designation is required. New 
documentation is required every 5 years, or earlier, if the State 
agency determines that an area's rural status has changed significantly 
since the last designation;
    (iii) Whether the meal service is congregate or non-congregate;
    (iv) For open sites and restricted open sites:
    (A) Documentation supporting the eligibility of each site as 
serving an area in which poor economic conditions exist;
    (B) When school data are used, new documentation is required every 
5 years;
    (C) When census data are used, new documentation is required every 
5 years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's 
socioeconomic status has changed significantly since the last census; 
and
    (D) Any site that a sponsor proposes to serve during an 
unanticipated school closure, which has participated in the Program at 
any time during the current year or in either of the prior 2 calendar 
years, is considered eligible without new documentation;
    (v) For closed enrolled sites:
    (A) The projected number of children enrolled and the projected 
number of children eligible for free and reduced price school meals for 
each of these sites; or documentation supporting the eligibility of 
each site as serving an area in which poor economic conditions exist;
    (B) When school data are used, new documentation is required every 
5 years; and
    (C) When census data are used, new documentation is required every 
5 years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's 
socioeconomic status has changed significantly since the last census;

[[Page 90351]]

    (vi) For NYSP sites, certification from the sponsor that all of the 
children who will receive Program meals are enrolled participants in 
the NYSP;
    (vii) For camps, the number of children enrolled in each session 
who meet the Program's income standards. If such information is not 
available at the time of application, this information must be 
submitted as soon as possible thereafter, and in no case later than the 
filing of the camp's claim for reimbursement for each session; and
    (viii) For conditional non-congregate sites, the number of children 
enrolled who meet the Program's income standards. If such information 
is not available at the time of application, this information must be 
submitted as soon as possible thereafter, and in no case later than the 
filing of the sponsor's claim for reimbursement.
    (h) Approval of sites. (1) When evaluating a proposed food service 
site, the State agency must ensure that:
    (i) If not a camp or a conditional non-congregate site, the 
proposed site serves an area in which poor economic conditions exist, 
as defined by Sec.  225.2;
    (ii) The area which the site proposes to serve is not or will not 
be served in whole or in part by another site, unless it can be 
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the State agency that each site 
will serve children not served by any other site in the same area for 
the same meal;
    (iii) The site is approved to serve no more than the number of 
children for which its facilities are adequate; and
    (iv) If it is a site proposed to operate during an unanticipated 
school closure, it is a non-school site.
    (2) When approving the application of a site which will serve meals 
prepared by a food service management company, the State agency must 
establish for each meal service an approved level for the maximum 
number of children's meals which may be served under the Program. These 
approved levels must be established in accordance with the following 
provisions:
    (i) The initial maximum approved level must be based upon the 
historical record of the number of meals served at the site if such a 
record has been established in prior years and the State agency 
determines that it is accurate. The State agency must develop a 
procedure for establishing initial maximum approved levels for sites 
when no accurate record from prior years is available. The State agency 
may consider participation at other similar sites located in the area, 
documentation of programming taking place at the site, statistics on 
the number of children residing in the area, and other relevant 
information.
    (ii) The maximum approved level must be adjusted, if warranted, 
based upon information collected during site reviews. If the number of 
meals served at the site on the day of the review is significantly 
below the site's approved level, the State agency should consider 
making a downward adjustment in the approved level with the objective 
of providing only one meal per child.
    (iii) The sponsor may seek an upward adjustment in the approved 
level for its sites by requesting a site review or by providing the 
State agency with evidence that the number of meals served exceeds the 
sites' approved levels. The sponsor may request an upward adjustment at 
any point prior to submitting the claim for the impacted reimbursement 
period.
    (iv) Whenever the State agency establishes or adjusts approved 
levels of meal service for a site, it must document the action in its 
files, and it shall provide the sponsor with immediate written 
confirmation of the approved level.
    (v) Upon approval of its application or any adjustment to its 
maximum approved levels, the sponsor must inform the food service 
management company with which it contracts of the approved level for 
each meal service at each site served by the food service management 
company. This notification of any adjustments in approved levels must 
take place within the time frames set forth in the contract for 
adjusting meal orders. Whenever the sponsor notifies the food service 
management company of the approved levels or any adjustments to these 
levels for any of its sites, the sponsor must clearly inform the food 
service management company that an approved level of meal service 
represents the maximum number of meals which may be served at a site 
and is not a standing order for a specific number of meals at that 
site. When the number of children being served meals is below the 
site's approved level, the sponsor must adjust meal orders with the 
objective of serving only one meal per child as required under Sec.  
225.15(b)(3).
    (3) When approving the application of a site that will provide a 
non-congregate meal service, the State agency must ensure that the 
proposed site:
    (i) Meets the requirements described in paragraphs (h)(1) and (2) 
of this section.
    (ii) Is rural, as defined in Sec.  225.2.
    (iii) Will not serve an area where children would receive the same 
meal at an approved congregate meal site, unless it can be demonstrated 
to the satisfaction of the State agency that the site will serve a 
different group of children who may not be otherwise served.
    (iv) Serves an area in which poor economic conditions exist or is 
approved for reimbursement only for meals served free to enrolled 
children who meet the Program's income standards.
    (v) Distributes up to the allowable number of reimbursable meals 
that would be provided over a 10-calendar day period. The State agency 
may establish a shorter calendar day period on a case-by-case basis and 
without regard to sponsor type.
    (4) When approving the application of a site which will provide 
both congregate and non-congregate meal services, the State agency must 
ensure that:
    (i) The proposed site meets the requirements in paragraphs (h)(1) 
through (3) of this section.
    (ii) The proposed site will only conduct a non-congregate meal 
service when the site is not providing a congregate meal service.
    (iii) The sponsor proposes an organized and supervised system which 
prevents overlap between meal services and reasonably ensures children 
are not receiving more than the daily maximum allowance of meals as 
required in Sec.  225.16(b)(3).
    (i) State-sponsor agreement. A sponsor approved for participation 
in the Program must enter into a permanent written agreement with the 
State agency. The existence of a valid permanent agreement does not 
limit the State agency's ability to terminate the agreement, as 
provided under Sec.  225.11(c). The State agency must terminate the 
sponsor's agreement whenever a sponsor's participation in the Program 
ends. The State agency or sponsor may terminate the agreement at its 
convenience, upon mutual agreement, due to considerations unrelated to 
either party's performance of Program responsibilities under the 
agreement. However, any action initiated by the State agency to 
terminate an agreement for its convenience requires prior consultation 
with FNS. All sponsors must agree in writing to:
    (1) Operate a nonprofit food service during the period specified, 
as follows:
    (i) From May through September for children on school vacation;
    (ii) At any time of the year, in the case of sponsors administering 
the Program under a continuous school calendar system; or
    (iii) During the period from October through April, if it serves an 
area

[[Page 90352]]

affected by an unanticipated school closure due to a natural disaster, 
major building repairs, court orders relating to school safety or other 
issues, labor-management disputes, or, when approved by the State 
agency, a similar cause.
    (2) For school food authorities, offer meals which meet the 
requirements and provisions set forth in Sec.  225.16 during times 
designated as meal service periods by the sponsor and offer the same 
meals to all children.
    (3) For all other sponsors, serve meals which meet the requirements 
and provisions set forth in Sec.  225.16 during times designated as 
meal service periods by the sponsor and serve the same meals to all 
children.
    (4) Serve meals without cost to all children, except that camps and 
conditional non-congregate sites may charge for meals served to 
children who are not served meals under the Program.
    (5) Issue a free meal policy statement in accordance with paragraph 
(c) of this section.
    (6) Meet the training requirement for its administrative and site 
personnel, as required under Sec.  225.15(d)(1).
    (7) Claim reimbursement only for the types of meals specified in 
the agreement that are served:
    (i) Without charge to children at approved sites, except camps and 
conditional non-congregate sites, during the approved meal service 
time;
    (ii) Without charge to children who meet the Program's income 
standards in camps and conditional non-congregate sites;
    (iii) Within the approved level for the maximum number of 
children's meals that may be served, if a maximum approved level is 
required under paragraph (h)(2) of this section;
    (iv) At the approved meal service time, unless a change is approved 
by the State agency, as required under Sec.  225.16(c); and
    (v) At the approved site, unless the requirements in Sec.  
225.16(g) are met.
    (8) Submit claims for reimbursement in accordance with procedures 
established by the State agency, and those stated in Sec.  225.9.
    (9) In the storage, preparation and service of food, maintain 
proper sanitation and health standards in conformance with all 
applicable State and local laws and regulations.
    (10) Accept and use, in quantities that may be efficiently utilized 
in the Program, such foods as may be offered as a donation by the 
Department.
    (11) Have access to facilities necessary for storing, preparing, 
and serving food.
    (12) Maintain a financial management system as prescribed by the 
State agency.
    (13) Maintain on file documentation of site visits and reviews in 
accordance with Sec.  225.15(d) (2) and (3).
    (14) Upon request, make all accounts and records pertaining to the 
Program available to State, Federal, or other authorized officials for 
audit or administrative review, at a reasonable time and place. The 
records shall be retained for a period of 3 years after the end of the 
fiscal year to which they pertain, unless audit or investigative 
findings have not been resolved, in which case the records shall be 
retained until all issues raised by the audit or investigation have 
been resolved.
    (15) For approved congregate meal service, maintain children on 
site while meals are consumed. Sponsors may allow a child to take one 
fruit, vegetable, or grain item off-site for later consumption if the 
requirements in Sec.  225.16(h) are met.
    (16) Retain final financial and administrative responsibility for 
its program.
* * * * *

0
13. In Sec.  225.7, revise paragraphs (d), (e)(2) and (4), (e)(5)(i), 
(j), and (n)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  225.7  Program monitoring and assistance.

* * * * *
    (d) Pre-approval visits. The State agency must conduct pre-approval 
visits of sponsors and sites, as specified in paragraph (d)(1) through 
(4) of this section, to assess the applicant sponsor's or site's 
potential for successful Program operations and to verify information 
provided in the application.
    (1) The State agency must visit, prior to approval:
    (i) All applicant sponsors that did not participate in the program 
in the prior year;
    (ii) All applicant sponsors that had operational problems noted in 
the prior year; and
    (iii) All sites that the State agency has determined need a pre-
approval visit.
    (2) If a sponsor is a school food authority or Child and Adult Care 
Food Program institution and was reviewed by the State agency under 
their respective programs during the preceding 12 months, and had no 
significant deficiencies noted in that review, a pre-approval visit may 
be conducted at the discretion of the State agency.
    (3) Pre-approval visits of sponsors proposing to operate the 
Program during unanticipated school closures may be conducted at the 
discretion of the State agency.
    (4) Each State agency must establish a process to determine which 
sites need pre-approval visits. Characteristics that must be considered 
include, but are not limited to:
    (i) Sites that did not participate in the program in the prior 
year;
    (ii) Existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service; 
and
    (iii) Existing sites that exhibited operational problems in the 
prior year.
    (e) * * *
    (2) Sample selection. In determining which sponsors and sites to 
review, the State agency must, at a minimum, consider the sponsors and 
sites' previous participation in the Program, their current and 
previous Program performance, whether they operate as congregate or 
non-congregate sites, and the results of previous reviews.
* * * * *
    (4) Frequency and number of required reviews. State agencies must:
    (i) Conduct a review of every new sponsor at least once during the 
first year of operation;
    (ii) Annually review every sponsor that experienced significant 
operational problems in the prior year;
    (iii) Review each sponsor at least once every 3 years;
    (iv) Review more frequently those sponsors that, in the 
determination of the State agency, require additional technical 
assistance; and
    (v) As part of each sponsor review, conduct reviews of at least 10 
percent of each reviewed sponsor's sites, or one site, whichever number 
is greater. The review sample must include sites representative of all 
meal service models operated by the sponsor.
    (5) * * *
    (i) State agencies must develop criteria for site selection when 
selecting sites to meet the minimum number of sites required under 
paragraph (e)(4)(v) of this section. State agencies should, to the 
maximum extent possible, select sites that reflect the sponsor's entire 
population of sites. Characteristics that should be reflected in the 
sites selected for review include:
    (A) The maximum number of meals approved to serve under Sec.  
225.6(h)(1) and (2);
    (B) Method of obtaining meals (i.e., self-preparation or vended 
meal service);
    (C) Time since last site review by State agency;
    (D) Type of site (e.g., open, closed enrolled, camp);
    (E) Type of physical location (e.g., school, outdoor area, 
community center);
    (F) Rural designation (i.e., rural, as defined in Sec.  225.2, or 
non-rural);

[[Page 90353]]

    (G) Type of meal service (i.e., congregate or non-congregate);
    (H) If non-congregate, meal distribution method (e.g., meal pick-
up, delivery); and
    (I) Affiliation with the sponsor, as defined in Sec.  225.2.
* * * * *
    (j) Forms for reviews by sponsors. Each State agency must develop 
and provide monitor review forms to all approved sponsors. These forms 
must be completed by sponsor monitors. The monitor review form must 
include, but not be limited to:
    (1) The time of the reviewer's arrival and departure;
    (2) The site supervisor's printed name and signature;
    (3) A certification statement to be signed by the monitor;
    (4) The number of meals prepared or delivered;
    (5) Whether the meal service is congregate or non-congregate;
    (6) The number of meals served to children;
    (7) The deficiencies noted;
    (8) The corrective actions taken by the sponsor; and
    (9) The date of such actions.
* * * * *
    (n) * * *
    (1) Each State agency must comply with all requirements of title VI 
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, title IX of the Education Amendments 
of 1972, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Age 
Discrimination Act of 1975, and the Department's regulations concerning 
nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts 15, 15a, and 15b), including 
requirements for racial and ethnic participation data collection, 
public notification of the nondiscrimination policy, and reviews to 
assure compliance with such policy, to the end that no person must, on 
the grounds of race, color, national origin, sex (including gender 
identity and sexual orientation), age, or disability, be excluded from 
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected 
to discrimination under the Program.
* * * * *

0
14. In Sec.  225.8, revise paragraph (d)(2)(iii) and (iv) and add 
paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  225.8  Records and reports.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) The type of site approval--open, restricted open, closed 
enrolled, conditional non-congregate, or camp; and
    (iv) Any other important details about each site that would help 
the FNSRO plan reviews, including whether the site is rural or urban, 
congregate or non-congregate, or vended or self-preparation.
    (e) By June 30 of each year, or a later date approved by the 
appropriate FNSRO, the State agency must submit to FNS a list of open 
site locations and their operational details and provide a minimum of 
two updates during the summer operational period. State agencies are 
encouraged to submit updates weekly if there are any changes to their 
data.

0
15. In Sec.  225.9:
0
a. Revise paragraph (d)(9);
0
b. Redesignate paragraph (d)(10) as paragraph (d)(12);
0
c. Add new paragraph (d)(10) and paragraph (d)(11); and
0
d. Revise paragraph (f).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  225.9  Program assistance to sponsors.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (9) Sponsors of camps are reimbursed only for meals served to 
children in camps whose eligibility for Program meals is documented.
    (10) Sponsors of NYSP sites are reimbursed only for meals served to 
children enrolled in the NYSP.
    (11) Sponsors of conditional non-congregate sites are reimbursed 
only for meals served to children whose eligibility for Program meals 
is documented.
* * * * *
    (f) Meal claiming. The sponsor must not claim reimbursement for 
meals served to children at any site in excess of the site's approved 
level of meal service, if one has been established under Sec.  
225.6(h)(2). However, the total number of meals for which operating 
costs are claimed may exceed the approved level of meal service if the 
meals exceeding this level were served to adults performing necessary 
food service labor in accordance with paragraph (d)(5) of this section. 
In reviewing a sponsor's claim for congregate meals served, the State 
agency must ensure that reimbursements for second meals are limited to 
the percentage tolerance established in Sec.  225.15(b)(4).
* * * * *

0
16. In Sec.  225.11, revise paragraphs (c)(4) and (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  225.11  Corrective action procedures.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) Program violations at a significant proportion of the sponsor's 
sites. Such violations include, but are not limited to, the following:
    (i) Noncompliance with the meal service time restrictions set forth 
at Sec.  225.16(c), as applicable;
    (ii) Failure to maintain adequate records;
    (iii) Failure to adjust meal orders to conform to variations in the 
number of participating children;
    (iv) For congregate meal service operations, the simultaneous 
service of more than one meal to any child;
    (v) The claiming of Program payments for meals not served to 
participating children;
    (vi) For non-congregate meal service operations, distributing more 
than the daily meal limit when multi-day service is used;
    (vii) Service of a significant number of meals which did not 
include required quantities of all meal components;
    (viii) For congregate meal service operations, excessive instances 
of off-site meal consumption;
    (ix) Continued use of food service management companies that are in 
violation of health codes.
    (d) Meal service restriction. (1) With the exception for 
residential camps and non-congregate meal service set forth at Sec.  
225.16(b)(1)(ii) and (b)(5)(iii), respectively, the State agency must 
restrict to one meal service per day:
    (i) Any food service site which is determined to be in violation of 
the time restrictions for meal service set forth at Sec.  225.16(c) 
when corrective action is not taken within a reasonable time as 
determined by the State agency; and
    (ii) All sites under a sponsor if more than 20 percent of the 
sponsor's sites are determined to be in violation of the time 
restrictions set forth at Sec.  225.16(c).
    (2) If this action results in children not receiving meals under 
the Program, the State agency must make reasonable effort to locate 
another source of meal service for these children.
* * * * *

0
17. In Sec.  225.14:
0
a. Revise paragraph (c)(3);
0
b. Remove paragraph (d)(4);
0
c. Redesignate paragraphs (d)(5) and (6) as paragraphs (d)(4) and (5); 
and
0
d. Add new paragraph (d)(6) and paragraphs (d)(7) and (8).
    The revision and additions read as follows:


Sec.  225.14  Requirements for sponsor participation.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) Will conduct a regularly scheduled food service for children 
from areas in which poor economic conditions exist,

[[Page 90354]]

or qualifies as a camp or a conditional non-congregate site;
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (6) If the sponsor operates a non-congregate meal service that will 
deliver meals directly to a child's residence, it must obtain written 
parental consent prior to providing meals to children in that 
household.
    (7) If the sponsor operates a conditional non-congregate site, it 
must certify that it will collect information to determine children's 
Program eligibility to support its claim for reimbursement.
    (8) If the sponsor is not a school food authority, it must enter 
into a written agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the 
State agency or school food authority if it chooses to receive school 
data for the purposes of identifying eligible children and determining 
children's Program eligibility, as required under Sec.  225.15(k).

0
18. In Sec.  225.15, revise paragraphs (b)(3) and (4), (d), (e), and 
(f)(3) introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  225.15  Management responsibilities of sponsors.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) All sponsors must plan for and prepare or order meals on the 
basis of participation trends with the objective of providing only one 
meal per child at each meal service.
    (i) The sponsor must make the adjustments necessary to achieve this 
objective using the results from its monitoring of sites.
    (ii) The sponsor must adjust the number of meals ordered or 
prepared whenever the number of children receiving meals is below the 
maximum approved level of meal service.
    (iii) The sponsor must not order or prepare meals for children at 
any site in excess of the site's approved level, but may order or 
prepare meals above the approved level if the meals are to be served to 
adults performing necessary food service labor in accordance with Sec.  
225.9(d)(5).
    (iv) Records of participation and of preparation or ordering of 
meals must be maintained to demonstrate positive action toward meeting 
the objective of this paragraph (b)(3).
    (4) In recognition of the fluctuation in participation levels which 
makes it difficult to estimate precisely the number of meals needed and 
to reduce the resultant waste, sponsors may claim reimbursement for a 
number of second meals which does not exceed 2 percent of the number of 
first meals served to children for each meal type (i.e., breakfasts, 
lunches, supplements, or suppers) during the claiming period for 
congregate meals served. The State agency must disallow all claims for 
second meals if it determines that the sponsor failed to plan and 
prepare or order meals with the objective of providing only one meal 
per child at each meal service. Second meals must be served only after 
all participating children at the site's congregate meal service have 
been served a meal. Second meals may not be served as part of a non-
congregate meal service.
* * * * *
    (d) Training and monitoring. (1) Each sponsor must hold Program 
training sessions for its administrative and site personnel and must 
not allow a site to operate until personnel have attended at least one 
of these training sessions. The State agency may waive these training 
requirements for operation of the Program during unanticipated school 
closures.
    (i) Training of site personnel must, at a minimum, include: the 
purpose of the Program; site eligibility; recordkeeping; site 
operations, including both congregate and non-congregate meal services; 
meal pattern requirements; and the duties of a monitor.
    (ii) Each sponsor must ensure that its administrative personnel 
attend State agency training provided to sponsors, and sponsors must 
provide training throughout the summer to ensure that administrative 
personnel are thoroughly knowledgeable in all required areas of Program 
administration and operation and are provided with sufficient 
information to enable them to carry out their Program responsibilities.
    (iii) Each site must have present at each meal service at least one 
person who has received this training.
    (2) Sponsors must conduct pre-operational visits for new sites, 
sites that experienced operational problems the previous year, and 
existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service, to 
determine that the sites have the capacity to provide meal service for 
the anticipated number of children in attendance and the capability to 
conduct the proposed meal service.
    (3) Sponsors must visit each of their sites, as specified in 
paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through (iv) of this section, at least once during 
the first two weeks of program operations and must promptly take such 
actions as are necessary to correct any deficiencies. In cases where 
the site operates for seven calendar days or fewer, the visit must be 
conducted during the period of operation. Sponsors must conduct these 
visits for:
    (i) All new sites;
    (ii) All existing sites that are new to providing non-congregate 
meal service;
    (iii) All sites that have been determined by the sponsor to need a 
visit based on criteria established by the State agency pertaining to 
operational problems noted in the prior year, as set forth in Sec.  
225.7(o); and
    (iv) Any other sites that the State agency has determined need a 
visit.
    (4) Sponsors must conduct a full review of food service operations 
at each site at least once during the first four weeks of Program 
operations, and thereafter must maintain a reasonable level of site 
monitoring. Sponsors must complete a monitoring form developed by the 
State agency during the conduct of these reviews. Sponsors may conduct 
a full review of food service operations at the same time they are 
conducting a site visit required under paragraph (d)(3) of this 
section.
    (e) Notification to the community. Each sponsor must annually 
announce in the media serving the area from which it draws its 
attendance the availability of free meals. Sponsors of camps, closed 
enrolled sites, and conditional non-congregate sites must notify 
participants of the availability of free meals and if a free meal 
application is needed, as outlined in paragraph (f) of this section. 
For sites that use free meal applications to determine individual 
eligibility, notification to enrolled children must include: the 
Secretary's family-size and income standards for reduced price school 
meals labeled ``SFSP Income Eligibility Standards;'' a statement that a 
foster child and children who are members of households receiving SNAP, 
FDPIR, or TANF benefits are automatically eligible to receive free meal 
benefits at eligible program sites; and a statement that meals are 
available without regard to race, color, national origin, sex 
(including gender identity and sexual orientation), age, or disability. 
State agencies may issue a media release for all sponsors operating 
SFSP sites in the State as long as the notification meets the 
requirements in this section.
    (f) * * *
    (3) Application based on the household's receipt of SNAP, FDPIR, or 
TANF benefits. Households may apply on the basis of receipt of SNAP, 
FDPIR, or TANF benefits by providing the following information:
* * * * *

0
19. In Sec.  225.16:
0
a. Add paragraph (b)(5);
0
c. Revise paragraphs (c);
0
d. Amend paragraph (e)(4) by removing the word ``believes'' and adding 
in its place the word ``determines'';
0
e. Amend the first sentence of paragraph (h) by removing the word

[[Page 90355]]

``Sponsors'' and adding in its place the words ``For congregate meal 
services, sponsors''; and
0
f. Add paragraph (i).
    The additions and revision read as follows:


Sec.  225.16  Meal service requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) Non-congregate meal service. A sponsor of a site must have the 
administrative capability; the capacity to meet State and local health, 
safety, and sanitation requirements; and, where applicable, have 
adequate food preparation and holding facilities to be approved to 
serve non-congregate meals. Sponsors of sites that are approved to 
provide non-congregate meals in rural areas with no congregate meal 
service must:
    (i) Obtain prior written parental consent, if meals are to be 
delivered to a child's home, as described in Sec.  225.14(d)(6).
    (ii) Serve meals as described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
    (iii) Comply with meal service time requirements described in 
paragraphs (c)(1), (4), and (5) of this section.
    (iv) Claim reimbursement for all eligible meals served to children 
at sites in areas in which poor economic conditions exist, as defined 
in Sec.  225.2. At all other sites, only the non-congregate meals 
served to children who meet the eligibility standards for this Program 
may be reimbursed.
    (c) Meal service times. (1) Meal service times must be:
    (i) Established by sponsors for each site;
    (ii) Included in the sponsor's application; and
    (iii) Approved by the State agency. Approval of meal service times 
must be in accordance with the State agency or sponsor's capacity to 
monitor the full meal service during a review.
    (2) Except for non-congregate meal service, breakfast meals must be 
served at or close to the beginning of a child's day. Three component 
meals served after a lunch or supper meal service are not eligible for 
reimbursement as a breakfast.
    (3) At all sites except residential camps and non-congregate meal 
service, meal services must start at least one hour after the end of 
the previous meal or snack.
    (4) Meals served outside the approved meal service time:
    (i) Are not eligible for reimbursement; and
    (ii) May be approved for reimbursement by the State agency only if 
an unanticipated event, outside of the sponsor's control, occurs. The 
State agency may request documentation to support approval of meals 
claimed when an unanticipated event occurs.
    (5) The State agency must approve any permanent or planned changes 
in meal service time.
    (6) If congregate meals are not prepared on site:
    (i) Meal deliveries must arrive before the approved meal service 
time; and
    (ii) Meals must be delivered within one hour of the start of the 
meal service if the site does not have adequate storage to hold hot or 
cold meals at the temperatures required by State or local health 
regulations.
* * * * *
    (i) Non-congregate meal service options. The options described in 
this paragraph (i) are available to all types of sponsors in good 
standing, as defined in Sec.  225.2, that are approved to operate non-
congregate meal service sites. The State agency may limit the use of 
these options on a case-by-case basis, if it determines that a sponsor 
does not have the capability to operate or oversee non-congregate meal 
services at their sites. The State agency may not limit the use of 
options to only certain types of sponsors. The State agency's decision 
to prohibit a sponsor from using the options described in this 
paragraph (i) is not an appealable action. Sponsors in good standing 
may elect to use any of the following options:
    (1) Multi-day meal issuance. Approved sponsors may distribute up to 
the allowable number of reimbursable meals that would be provided over 
a 10-calendar day period. The State agency may establish a shorter time 
period, on a case-by-case basis. Sponsors electing this option must 
have documented procedures, submitted with their application, in place 
to ensure that the proper number of meals are distributed to each 
eligible child.
    (2) Parent or guardian pick-up of meals. Approved sponsors may 
distribute meals to parents or guardians to take home to their 
children. Sponsors electing this option must have documented 
procedures, submitted with their application, in place to ensure that 
meals are only distributed to parents or guardians of eligible children 
and that duplicate meals are not distributed to any child.
    (3) Bulk meal components. Approved self-preparation sponsors may 
provide bulk food items that meet the minimum amounts of each food 
component of a reimbursable meal breakfast, lunch, supper, or snack, as 
described in paragraph (d) of this section. Sponsors electing this 
option must ensure that:
    (i) Required food components for each reimbursable meal are served, 
as described in paragraph (d) of this section.
    (ii) All food items that contribute to a reimbursable meal are 
clearly identifiable.
    (ii) Menus are provided and clearly indicate the food items and 
portion sizes for each reimbursable meal.
    (iv) Food preparation, such as heating or warming, is minimal. 
Sponsors may offer food items that require further preparation only 
with State agency and FNSRO approval.
    (v) The maximum number of reimbursable meals provided to a child 
does not exceed the number of meals that could be provided over a 5-
calendar day period. The State agency may establish a shorter or longer 
time period, which may not exceed the time period for which the sponsor 
is approved for multi-day meal issuance, on a case-by-case basis.

0
20. In Sec.  225.18, add paragraph (l) to read as follows:


Sec.  225.18  Miscellaneous administrative provisions.

* * * * *
    (l) Updates to data sources. By January 1 each year, or as soon as 
is practicable, FNS will issue any necessary updates to approved data 
sources listed under the definition of ``rural'' in Sec.  225.2 to be 
used for rural site designations in that program year. FNS will make 
this information available and referenceable in a simplified format.

0
21. Add part 292 to read as follows:

PART 292--SUMMER ELECTRONIC BENEFITS TRANSFER PROGRAM

Sec.
Subpart A--General
292.1 General purpose and scope.
292.2 Definitions.
292.3 Administration.
292.4 [Reserved]
Subpart B--Eligibility Standards and Criteria
292.5 General purpose and scope.
292.6 Eligibility.
292.7 Period to establish eligibility.
Subpart C--Requirements of Summer EBT Agencies
292.8 Plan for Operations and Management.
292.9 Coordination between State-administered and ITO-administered 
Summer EBT Programs.
292.10 Coordinated Services Plan.
292.11 Advance Planning Document (APD) processes.
292.12 Enrolling eligible children.
292.13 Application requirements.
292.14 Verification requirements.

[[Page 90356]]

Subpart D--Issuance and Use of Program Benefits
292.15 General standards.
292.16 Issuance and adjustment requirements specific to States that 
administer SNAP.
292.17 Retailer integrity requirements specific to States that 
administer SNAP.
292.18 Requirements specific to States that administer Nutrition 
Assistance Program (NAP) programs.
292.19 Requirements specific to ITO Summer EBT agencies.
Subpart E--General Administrative Requirements
292.20 Payments to Summer EBT agencies and use of administrative 
program funds.
292.21 Standards for financial management systems.
292.22 Performance criteria.
292.23 Records and reports.
292.24 Audits and management control evaluations.
292.25 Investigations.
292.26 Hearing procedure for families and Summer EBT agencies.
292.27 Claims.
292.28 Procurement standards.
292.29 Miscellaneous administrative provisions.
292.30 Severability.
292.31 [Reserved]

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1762.

Subpart A--General


Sec.  292.1  General purpose and scope.

    (a) This part establishes the regulations under which the Secretary 
will administer the Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) 
Program. Section 13A of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 
Act authorizes the Secretary to establish a Program under which States, 
and Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) that administer the Special 
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), 
electing to participate in the Summer EBT Program must, beginning in 
Summer 2024 and annually thereafter, issue to each eligible household 
Summer EBT benefits.
    (b) This program was established for the purpose of providing 
nutrition assistance during the summer months for each eligible child, 
to ensure continued access to food when school is not in session for 
the summer.


Sec.  292.2  Definitions.

    2 CFR part 200 means the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost 
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards published by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The part reference covers 
applicable: Acronyms and Definitions (subpart A), General Provisions 
(subpart B), Post Federal Award Requirements (subpart D), Cost 
Principles (subpart E), and Audit Requirements (subpart F).
    Act means the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, as 
amended.
    Acquisition means obtaining supplies or services through a purchase 
or lease, regardless of whether the supplies or services are already in 
existence or must be developed, created, or evaluated.
    Administrative costs means costs incurred by a Summer EBT agency, 
LEA, or local agencies operating in a formal agreement with a Summer 
EBT agency related to planning, organizing, and managing a Summer EBT 
Program.
    Adult means, for the purposes of completing an application for 
eligibility for Program benefits, any individual 18 years of age or 
older.
    Advance Planning Document for project planning or Planning APD (APD 
or PAPD) means a brief written plan of action that requests Federal 
financial participation to accomplish the planning activities necessary 
for a Summer EBT agency to determine the need for, feasibility of, 
projected costs and benefits of an IS equipment or services 
acquisition, plan the acquisition of IS equipment and/or services, and 
to acquire information necessary to prepare an Implementation APD.
    Advance Planning Document Update (APDU) means a document submitted 
annually (Annual APDU) by the Summer EBT agency to report the status of 
project activities and expenditures in relation to the approved 
Planning APD or Implementation APD; or on an as needed basis (As Needed 
APDU) to request funding approval for project continuation when 
significant project changes occur or are anticipated.
    Cash-Value Benefit (CVB) means a type of benefit that is a fixed-
dollar amount used to obtain supplemental foods by participants served 
by an ITO Summer EBT agency for the purposes of the Summer EBT Program.
    Categorically eligible means considered income eligible for Summer 
EBT, as applicable, based on documentation that a child is a member of 
a household, as defined in this section, and one or more children in 
that household are receiving assistance under SNAP, TANF, or FDPIR, or 
another means tested program, as approved by the Secretary. A foster 
child, homeless child, a migrant child, a Head Start child and a 
runaway child, as defined in Sec.  245.2 of this chapter, are also 
categorically eligible. Categorical eligibility and automatic 
eligibility may be used synonymously.
    Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) means proprietary software products 
that are ready-made and available for sale to the general public at 
established catalog or market prices in which the software vendor is 
not positioned as the sole implementer or integrator of the product.
    Continuous school calendar means a situation in which all or part 
of the student body of a school is:
    (1) On a vacation for periods of 15 continuous school days or more 
during the period October through April; and
    (2) In attendance at regularly scheduled classes during most of the 
period May through September.
    Current income means income received during the month prior to 
application for Summer EBT benefits. If such income does not accurately 
reflect the household's annual income, income must be based on the 
projected annual household income. If the prior year's income provides 
an accurate reflection of the household's current annual income, the 
prior year may be used as a base for the projected annual income.
    Department means the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
    Direct verification means the process of verifying household income 
or categorical eligibility by matching against data sources or other 
records without the need to contact households for documentation.
    Disclosure means reveal or use individual children's program 
eligibility information obtained through the Summer EBT eligibility 
process for a purpose other than for the purpose for which the 
information was obtained. The term refers to access, release, or 
transfer of personal data about children by means of print, tape, 
microfilm, microfiche, electronic communication or any other means.
    Dual participation means a child simultaneously receiving benefits 
from more than one State or ITO-administered Summer EBT Program, or 
simultaneously receiving multiple allotments from the same State or 
ITO-administered Summer EBT Program.
    Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) account means a set of records 
containing demographic, card, benefit, transaction, and balance data 
for an individual household within the EBT system that is maintained 
and managed by a Summer EBT agency or its contractor as part of the 
client case record.
    Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card means a method to access EBT 
benefits issued to a household member or authorized representative 
through the EBT system by a benefit issuer. This method may include an 
on-line magnetic stripe card, an off-line smart card, a chip card, a 
contactless digital

[[Page 90357]]

wallet with a stored card, or any other similar benefit access 
technology approved by USDA.
    Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) contractor or vendor means an 
entity that is selected to perform EBT-related services for the Summer 
EBT agency.
    Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) system means an electronic 
payments system under which benefits are issued from and stored in a 
central databank, maintained and managed by a Summer EBT agency or its 
contractor, and uses electronic funds transfer technology for the 
delivery and control of food and other public assistance benefits.
    Eligible child means a child who meets the requirements to receive 
Summer EBT benefits as provided in Sec. Sec.  292.5 and 292.6.
    Eligible household means a household that includes at least one 
eligible child.
    Enhancement means modifications which change the functions of 
software and hardware beyond their original purposes, not just to 
correct errors or deficiencies which may have been present in the 
software or hardware, or to improve the operational performance of the 
software or hardware. Software enhancements that substantially increase 
risk or cost or functionality will require submission of an IAPD or an 
As Needed IAPDU.
    Enrolled students means students who are enrolled in and attending 
schools participating in the NSLP/SBP and who have access to a meal 
service (breakfast or lunch) on a regular basis.
    Expungement means the removal of Summer-EBT benefits from the EBT 
account to which they were issued, typically by an EBT processor on 
behalf of a Summer EBT agency.
    FDPIR means the food distribution program for households on Indian 
reservations operated under 7 CFR part 253, and the food distribution 
program for Indian households in Oklahoma under 7 CFR part 254.
    FNS means the Food and Nutrition Service, United States Department 
of Agriculture.
    FNSRO means an FNS Regional Office.
    Firm, as used in this part:
    (1) Means:
    (i) A retail food store that is authorized to accept or redeem 
Summer EBT benefits;
    (ii) A retail food store that is not authorized to accept or redeem 
Summer EBT benefits; or
    (iii) An entity that does not meet the definition of a retail food 
store in Sec.  271.2 of this chapter.
    (2) For purposes of the regulations in this part the terms firm, 
entity, retailer, and store may be used interchangeably.
    Food instrument, as applicable to ITO Summer EBT agencies, means 
the definition set forth in WIC regulations at Sec.  246.2 of this 
chapter.
    Household means a group of related or nonrelated individuals, who 
are not residents of an institution or boarding house, but who are 
living as one economic unit.
    Implementation Advance Planning Document or Implementation APD 
(IAPD) means a written plan of action requesting Federal financial 
participation (FFP) to acquire and implement Electronic Benefit 
Transaction services. The Implementation APD includes the general 
design, development, testing, and implementation phases of the project 
during its initiation. Once the Summer EBT process becomes more routine 
(e.g., after its initial implementation), the IAPD will be streamlined 
to include one the following documents as outlined in this section and 
in FNS Handbook 901:
    (1) Transmittal letter.
    (2) Cost Allocation Plan.
    (3) Pre-conversion outlays (where applicable).
    (4) Brief schedule of events and payments, and budget.
    Income eligibility guidelines means the household-size and income 
standards prescribed annually by the Secretary for determining income 
eligibility for reduced price meals under the National School Lunch 
Program and the School Breakfast Program.
    Indian Tribal Organization (ITO) means an Indian Tribe, band, or 
group recognized by the Department of the Interior or an intertribal 
council or group which is an authorized representative of Indian 
Tribes, bands or groups recognized by the Department of the Interior 
and which has an ongoing relationship with such Tribes, bands or 
groups. For the purposes of the Summer EBT Program, this definition 
only includes those Indian Tribal Organizations which administer the 
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children 
(WIC Program) established under section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act 
of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786). For the purposes of the Summer EBT Program, 
an administering Indian Tribal Organization is also referred to as a 
``Summer EBT agency''.
    Information System (IS) means a combination of hardware and 
software, data and telecommunications that performs specific functions 
to support the Summer EBT agency, or other Federal, State, or local 
organization.
    Instructional year means the period from July 1 of the prior year 
through one day prior to the summer operational period.
    ITO Service Area means the geographic area served by an ITO Summer 
EBT agency.
    Local Education Agency (LEA) means a public board of education or 
other public or private nonprofit authority legally constituted within 
a State for either administrative control or direction of, or to 
perform a service function for, public or private nonprofit elementary 
schools or secondary schools in a city, county, township, school 
district, or other political subdivision of a State, or for a 
combination of school districts or counties that is recognized in a 
State as an administrative agency for its public or private nonprofit 
elementary schools or secondary schools. The term also includes any 
other public or private nonprofit institution or agency having 
administrative control and direction of a public or private nonprofit 
elementary school or secondary school, including residential child care 
institutions, Bureau of Indian Affairs schools, and educational service 
agencies and consortia of those agencies, as well as the State 
educational agency in a State or territory in which the State 
educational agency is the sole educational agency for all public or 
private nonprofit schools.
    NSLP/SBP means the National School Lunch Program established under 
the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et 
seq.) and/or the School Breakfast Program established under the Child 
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.).
    NSLP/SBP application means an application for free and reduced 
price meals, submitted by a household for a child or children enrolled 
at an NSLP- or SBP-participating school(s). Eligibility determinations 
based on NSLP/SBP applications may be used to confer eligibility for 
Summer EBT.
    OIG means the Office of Inspector General of the Department.
    Period of eligibility means the period of time from the first day 
of instructional year, as defined in this section, immediately 
preceding the summer operational period, as defined in this section, 
through the last day of the summer operational period.
    Planning Advanced Planning Document (PAPD) means a brief written 
plan of action that requests FFP to accomplish the planning activities 
necessary for a Summer EBT agency to determine the need for, 
feasibility of, projected costs and benefits of EBT service 
acquisitions, plan the acquisition of EBT services, and to acquire 
information necessary to

[[Page 90358]]

prepare an Implementation APD when there is a change or an enhancement 
to the EBT technology.
    Program means the Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children 
Program authorized by section 13A of the Richard B. Russell National 
School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1762.
    Program funds means Federal financial assistance made available to 
Summer EBT agencies for the purpose of making Program payments.
    Project means a related set of information technology related 
tasks, undertaken by a Summer EBT agency, to improve the efficiency, 
economy and effectiveness of administration and/or operation of its 
human services programs. A project may also be a less comprehensive 
activity such as office automation, enhancements to an existing system, 
or an upgrade of computer hardware.
    Request for Proposal (RFP) means the document used for public 
solicitations of competitive proposals from qualified sources as 
outlined in paragraphs (1) through (7) of this definition:
    (1) In competitive negotiation, proposals are requested from a 
number of sources and the Request for Proposal is publicized, 
negotiations are normally conducted with more than one of the sources 
submitting offers, and either a fixed-price or cost-reimbursable type 
contract is awarded, as appropriate.
    (2) Competitive negotiation may be used if conditions are 
appropriate for the use of formal advertising. If competitive 
negotiation is used for procurement under a grant, the following 
requirements must apply:
    (i) Proposals must be solicited from an adequate number of 
qualified sources to permit reasonable competition consistent with the 
nature and requirements of the procurement. The Request for Proposals 
must be publicized and reasonable requests by other sources to compete 
must be honored to the maximum extent practicable.
    (ii) The Request for Proposal must identify significant evaluation 
factors, including price or cost where required and their relative 
importance.
    (iii) The Summer EBT agency must provide procedures for technical 
evaluation of the proposals received, determinations of responsible 
offerors for the purpose of written or oral discussions, and selection 
for contract award.
    (iv) Award may be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal 
will be most advantageous to the Summer EBT agency, price and other 
factors considered. Unsuccessful offerors should be notified promptly.
    (v) State agencies may utilize competitive negotiation procedures 
for procurement of architectural/engineering professional services 
whereby competitors' qualifications are evaluated, and the most 
qualified competitor is selected subject to negotiation of fair and 
reasonable compensation.
    Rolling verification means sampling applications for verification 
on a rolling basis from the beginning of the instructional year 
immediately preceding the summer operational period.
    School aged means the years in which a child is required to attend 
school, or an equivalent program as defined by State or Tribal law. 
Also known as the age requirement for compulsory education.
    Secretary means the Secretary of Agriculture.
    SNAP means the program operated pursuant to the Food and Nutrition 
Act of 2008.
    SNAP eligible foods means any food or food product that meets the 
definition of eligible foods at Sec.  271.2 of this chapter.
    SNAP retail food store means an establishment that meets the 
definition of retail food store at Sec.  271.2 of this chapter.
    Special provision school means, for the purposes of Summer EBT, 
those schools which do not collect NSLP/SBP applications annually 
described in section 11(a)(1)(B)-(F) of the Richard B. Russell National 
School Lunch Act (NSLA) which are provision 1 at Sec.  245.9(a) of this 
chapter, provision 2 at Sec.  245.9(b) and (c) of this chapter, 
provision 3 at Sec.  245.9(d) and (e) of this chapter, and the 
community eligibility provision codified at Sec.  245.9(f) of this 
chapter.
    State means any of the fifty States, the District of Columbia, the 
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American 
Samoa, or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
    Streamlined certification means automatically enrolling an eligible 
child for Summer EBT, without need for further application or 
confirmation of school enrollment.
    Summer EBT application means an application submitted to a Summer 
EBT agency or an NSLP/SBP-participating school by a household for a 
child or children who are enrolled at a NSLP/SBP-participating school 
for Summer EBT benefits. Eligibility determinations based on Summer EBT 
applications may not be used to confer eligibility for the NSLP/SBP.
    Summer EBT agency, as used in this part:
    (1) Means:
    (i)(A) Any agency of State government that has been designated by 
the Governor or other appropriate executive or legislative authority of 
the State which is responsible for the administration of the Summer EBT 
Program within the State and enters into a written agreement with USDA 
to administer Summer EBT. In those States where such assistance 
programs are operated on a decentralized basis, it includes all State 
agencies that assist with administration of the Summer EBT Program 
unless otherwise specified.
    (B) Coordinating Summer EBT agencies have an inter-agency written 
agreement with partnering Summer EBT agencies to administer the 
Program, as applicable.
    (ii) An ITO that is responsible for the administration of the 
Summer EBT Program and has entered into a written agreement with USDA 
to administer Summer EBT.
    (2) Summer EBT agencies may be further described to clarify roles 
and requirements, as necessary, including:
    (i) Coordinating Summer EBT agency means the Summer EBT agency 
within a State that is designated as the primary point of contact for 
USDA for the Summer EBT Program within the State or ITO and is 
responsible for the effective and efficient administration of the 
Program.
    (ii) Partnering Summer EBT agency means a Summer EBT agency other 
than the coordinating Summer EBT agency that has a role in 
administration of the Program.
    (iii) ITO Summer EBT agency means an agency of an ITO that 
administers the Program on behalf of the ITO.
    (iv) State Summer EBT agency means an agency of a State that 
administers the Program on behalf of the State.
    Summer operational period means the benefit period that generally 
reflects the period between the end of classes during the current 
school year and the start of classes for the next school year, as 
determined by the Summer EBT agency.
    Supplemental foods means, for the purposes of ITOs administering 
the Summer EBT Program, foods--
    (1) Containing nutrients determined by nutritional research to be 
lacking in the diets of children; and
    (2) Promoting the health of the population served by the program 
under this section, as indicated by relevant nutrition science, public 
health concerns, and cultural eating patterns, as determined by FNS; 
and

[[Page 90359]]

    (3) Supplemental foods authorized for the WIC Program by the 
applicable WIC ITO meet the requirements set forth in this definition, 
excluding infant foods and infant formula.
    System error means an error resulting from a malfunction at any 
point in the redemption process. These adjustments may occur after the 
availability date and may result in either a debit or credit to the 
household.
    TANF means the State funded program under part A of title IV of the 
Social Security Act that the Secretary determines complies with 
standards established by the Secretary that ensure that the standards 
under the State program are comparable to or more restrictive than 
those in effect on June 1, 1995. This program is commonly referred to 
as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, although States may refer 
to the program by another name.
    Trafficking means:
    (1)(i) The buying, selling, stealing, or otherwise effecting an 
exchange of Summer EBT benefits issued and accessed via Electronic 
Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards, card numbers, and personal identification 
numbers (PINs), or by manual voucher and signature, for cash or 
consideration other than eligible food, either directly, indirectly, in 
complicity or collusion with others, or acting alone;
    (ii) The exchange of firearms, ammunition, explosives, or 
controlled substances, as defined in 21 U.S.C. 802, for Summer EBT 
benefits;
    (iii) Purchasing a product with Summer EBT benefits that has a 
container requiring a return deposit with the intent of obtaining cash 
by intentionally discarding the product and intentionally returning the 
container for the deposit amount;
    (iv) Purchasing a product with Summer EBT benefits with the intent 
of obtaining cash or consideration other than eligible food by 
reselling the product, and subsequently intentionally reselling the 
product purchased with Summer EBT benefits in exchange for cash or 
consideration other than eligible food; or
    (v) Intentionally purchasing products originally purchased with 
Summer EBT benefits in exchange for cash or consideration other than 
eligible food.
    (2) Attempting to buy, sell, steal, or otherwise affect an exchange 
of Summer EBT benefits issued and accessed via Electronic Benefit 
Transfer (EBT) cards, card numbers and personal identification numbers 
(PINs), or by manual voucher and signatures, for cash or consideration 
other than eligible food, either directly, indirectly, in complicity or 
collusion with others, or acting alone.
    Vendor means a sole proprietorship, partnership, cooperative 
association, corporation, or other business entity operating one or 
more stores enrolled by an ITO for the purposes of the Summer EBT 
Program to provide supplemental foods in areas approved for service. To 
be eligible for the Summer EBT Program, the vendor must be authorized 
by the WIC ITO to provide authorized supplemental foods to WIC 
participants under a retail food delivery system.
    Verification means confirmation of eligibility for the Summer EBT 
Program when a child's eligibility is established through a Summer EBT 
application. Verification includes confirmation of income eligibility 
and, at State or local discretion, may also include confirmation of any 
other information required in the application. Direct verification, as 
outlined in Sec.  292.14(e), must be attempted prior to contacting the 
household. If such efforts are unsuccessful, verification may be 
accomplished by examining information provided by the household such as 
wage stubs, or by other means as specified in Sec.  292.14(f)(3). If a 
SNAP or TANF case number or a FDPIR case number or other identifier is 
provided for a child, verification for such child must only include 
confirmation that the child is a member of a household receiving SNAP, 
TANF, or FDPIR benefits.
    Verification for cause means verification of questionable 
applications, on a case-by-case basis, such as an instance when the 
Summer EBT agency is made aware of conflicting or inconsistent 
information than what was provided on the application.
    WIC or WIC Program means the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program 
for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) established under section 17 of 
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786).


Sec.  292.3  Administration.

    (a) Delegation to FNS. FNS must act on behalf of USDA in the 
administration of the Program.
    (b) Delegation to a State or ITO. The Governor or other appropriate 
executive or legislative authority of the State or ITO will designate 
one or more Summer EBT agencies to be responsible for the 
administration of the Summer EBT Program within the State or ITO. If 
more than one Summer EBT agency is named within a State or ITO, a 
coordinating Summer EBT agency must be named. All other Summer EBT 
agencies will be partnering Summer EBT agencies.
    (1) Coordinating Summer EBT agency. (i) Each coordinating Summer 
EBT agency must enter into a written agreement with USDA for the 
administration of the Program in accordance with the applicable 
requirements of this part.
    (ii) The coordinating Summer EBT agency is:
    (A) The primary point of contact for the Summer EBT Program within 
the State or ITO;
    (B) Responsible for the complete and timely submission of any 
required plans, forms, and reports;
    (C) Responsible for activities as outlined in the inter-agency 
written agreement; and
    (D) Responsible for the effective and efficient administration of 
the Program in accordance with the requirements of this part; the 
Department's regulations governing nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts 15, 
15a, and 15b); governing administration of grants (2 CFR part 200, 
subparts A through F, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 
400 and 415); governing non-procurement debarment/suspension (2 CFR 
part 180 and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR part 417); 
governing restrictions on lobbying (2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and USDA 
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400, 415, and 418); and 
governing the drug-free workplace requirements (2 CFR part 182); FNS 
guidelines; and, instructions issued under the FNS Directives 
Management System.
    (2) Partnering Summer EBT agencies. (i) Each partnering Summer EBT 
agency must enter into a written agreement with USDA for the 
administration of the Program in accordance with the applicable 
requirements of this part.
    (ii) The partnering Summer EBT agency is:
    (A) Responsible for activities as outlined in the inter-agency 
written agreement. If only one Agency will be responsible for the 
administration of Summer EBT, designation of partnering agencies is not 
applicable.
    (B) Responsible for the effective and efficient administration of 
the Program in accordance with the requirements of this part; the 
Department's regulations governing nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts 15, 
15a, and 15b); governing administration of grants (2 CFR part 200, 
subparts A through F, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 
400 and 415); governing non-procurement debarment/suspension (2 CFR 
part 180 and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR part 417); 
governing restrictions on lobbying (2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and USDA 
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400, 415, and 418); and 
governing the drug-free workplace requirements (2

[[Page 90360]]

CFR part 182); FNS guidelines; and, instructions issued under the FNS 
Directives Management System.
    (c) Designation of responsibility among Summer EBT agencies and 
requirements for written inter-agency agreements. To ensure clear roles 
and responsibilities, the coordinating Summer EBT agency and any 
partnering Summer EBT agency or agencies must enter into an inter-
agency written agreement that defines the roles and responsibilities of 
each, as well as the administrative structure and lines of authority, 
if applicable.
    (1) The inter-agency written agreement should outline the Summer 
EBT agencies assignment of responsibilities including, but not limited 
to:
    (i) Certification and enrollment of children;
    (ii) Issuance, control, and accountability of Summer EBT benefits 
and EBT cards;
    (iii) Developing and maintaining complaint procedures;
    (iv) Developing, conducting, and evaluating training;
    (v) Keeping records necessary to determine whether the program is 
being conducted in compliance with the requirements in this part for 
the proper storage and use of data. The records must survive the 
duration of this agreement;
    (vi) Submitting accurate and timely financial and program plans, 
forms, and reports; and
    (vii) Public notification and participant support.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (d) Suspension, termination, and closeout procedures. Whenever it 
is determined that a Summer EBT agency has materially failed to comply 
with the provisions of this part, FNS may suspend or terminate the 
agreement between FNS and the Summer EBT agency or agencies or take any 
other action as may be available and appropriate. A Summer EBT agency 
may also terminate the agreement, but must provide FNS at least 60 days 
advance written notice, including a detailed explanation and the 
proposed effective date of the change. FNS and the Summer EBT agency 
shall comply with the provisions of 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA 
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415 concerning grant 
suspension termination and closeout procedures.
    (e) Authority to waive statute and regulations for State Summer EBT 
agencies. (1) As authorized under section 12(l) of the Richard B. 
Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1760(l), FNS may waive 
provisions of such Act or the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, as amended, 
and the provisions of this part with respect to a State or eligible 
service provider. The provisions of this part required by other 
statutes may not be waived under this authority. FNS may only approve 
requests for a waiver that are submitted by a State Summer EBT agency 
and comply with the requirements at section 12(l)(1) and the 
limitations at section 12(l)(4), including that FNS may not grant a 
waiver that increases Federal costs.
    (2) A State Summer EBT agency may submit a request for a waiver 
under paragraph (e)(1) of this section in accordance with section 
12(l)(2) and the provisions of this part.
    (3) A State Summer EBT agency may submit a request to waive 
specific statutory or regulatory requirements on behalf of eligible 
service providers that operate in the State. Any waiver where the State 
concurs must be submitted to the appropriate FNSRO.
    (4) An eligible service provider may submit a request for a waiver 
under paragraph (e)(1) of this section in accordance with section 12(l) 
and the provisions of this part.
    (i) Any waiver request submitted by an eligible service provider 
must be submitted to the State Summer EBT agency for review.
    (ii) A State Summer EBT agency must act promptly on such a waiver 
request and must deny or concur with a request submitted by an eligible 
service provider.
    (iii) If a State Summer EBT agency concurs with a request from an 
eligible service provider, the Summer EBT agency must promptly forward 
to the appropriate FNSRO the request and a rationale, consistent with 
section 12(l)(2), supporting the request.
    (iv) By forwarding the request to the FNSRO, the State Summer EBT 
agency affirms:
    (A) The request meets all requirements for waiver submissions; and,
    (B) The State Summer EBT agency will conduct all monitoring 
requirements related to regular Program operations and the 
implementation of the waiver.
    (v) If the State Summer EBT agency denies the request, the State 
Summer EBT agency must notify the requesting eligible service provider 
and state the reason for denying the request in writing within 30 
calendar days of the State Summer EBT agency's receipt of the request. 
The State Summer EBT agency response is final and may not be appealed 
to FNS.
    (f) Waivers for ITO Summer EBT agencies. (1) The Secretary may 
waive or modify specific regulatory provisions of this part for one or 
more ITO Summer EBT agency. Waivers may be issued following an ITO 
Summer EBT agency request or at the discretion of USDA.
    (2) To be approvable, a waiver must:
    (i) Address a specific regulatory provision which cannot be 
implemented effectively by the requesting ITO operation;
    (ii) Result in more effective and efficient administration of the 
Program;
    (iii) Be consistent with the provisions of the Act; and
    (iv) Not result in material impairment of any statutory or 
regulatory rights of participants or potential participants.
    (3) When submitting requests for waivers, ITO Summer EBT agencies 
must provide compelling justification for the waiver in terms of how 
the waiver will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the 
administration of the Program. At a minimum, requests for waivers must 
include, but not necessarily be limited to:
    (i) Reasons why the waiver is needed;
    (ii) Anticipated impact on service to participants or potential 
participants who would be affected;
    (iii) Anticipated time period for which the waiver is needed; and
    (iv) A thorough description of the proposed waiver and how it would 
be implemented.


Sec.  292.4  [Reserved]

Subpart B--Eligibility Standards and Criteria


Sec.  292.5  General purpose and scope.

    (a) Summer EBT eligibility is based on the eligibility standards 
for the NSLP/SBP, which includes children who are income eligible for 
free or reduced-price school meals based on the Income Eligibility 
Guidelines published by the Department by notice in the Federal 
Register and in accordance with the household size and income standards 
for free and reduced price school meals, and children who are 
categorically eligible, as defined in Sec.  292.2.
    (b) The Income Eligibility Guidelines are published annually and 
change on July 1. The guidelines in effect on the date of application 
must be used to determine eligibility.


Sec.  292.6  Eligibility.

    Children eligible for Summer EBT include those who, at any time 
during the period of eligibility, are:
    (a) School-aged and categorically eligible.
    (b) Enrolled in an NSLP/SBP-participating school, except for 
special provision schools, and:
    (1) Categorically eligible;

[[Page 90361]]

    (2) Meet the requirements to receive free or reduced price meals at 
Sec.  292.5(a), as determined through an NSLP/SBP application;
    (3) Otherwise are determined eligible to receive a free or reduced 
price meal; or
    (4) Determined eligible through a Summer EBT application, 
consistent with Sec.  292.13.
    (c) Enrolled in a special provision school, and:
    (1) Categorically eligible;
    (2) Otherwise meet the requirements to receive free or reduced 
price meals at Sec.  292.5(a), as determined through an NSLP/SBP 
application; or
    (3) Determined eligible through a Summer EBT application, 
consistent with Sec.  292.13.


Sec.  292.7  Period to establish eligibility.

    (a) Eligibility for Summer EBT, as determined through an 
application or by streamlined certification, may be established from 
the first day of the instructional year immediately preceding the 
summer operational period through the last day of the summer 
operational period, as defined by the Summer EBT agency in the Plan for 
Operations and Management (POM).
    (b) Households are not required to report changes in circumstances 
during the instructional year or summer operational period, but a 
household may voluntarily contact the State or LEA to report any 
changes in income, household composition, or program participation.
    (c) The carryover period in the school meal programs, as required 
at Sec.  245.6(c)(1) of this chapter, may not be used to confer 
eligibility for Summer EBT benefits during the summer operational 
period following the instructional year in which the carryover benefit 
was provided as it is outside of the period to establish eligibility, 
as described in paragraph (a) of this section.

Subpart C--Requirements of Summer EBT Agencies


Sec.  292.8  Plan for Operations and Management.

    (a) Not later than August 15 of each year, the Summer EBT agency 
must submit to the FNS Regional Office its intent to administer the 
Summer EBT Program the following summer, along with an interim Plan for 
Operations and Management (POM) and expenditure plan for the Summer EBT 
Program for the upcoming fiscal year. For 2024 only, the Summer EBT 
agency must submit to the FNS regional office its intent to administer 
the Summer EBT Program by January 1, 2024, and the interim POM and 
expenditure plan as soon as is practicable. The interim POM must:
    (1) Include the Summer EBT agency's forecasted program 
participation, anticipated administrative funding needs as part of an 
expenditure plan, and other programmatic information required in 
paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, if applicable, to the extent 
that such information has been determined at the time of submission.
    (2) Be approved by FNS before the Summer EBT agency may draw 
Federal administrative funds for the fiscal year.
    (b) Not later than February 15 of each year, the Summer EBT agency 
must submit to the FNS Regional Office a final POM. The final POM must:
    (1) Address all the requirements of paragraphs (e) and (f) of this 
section, if applicable.
    (2) Be approved by FNS before the Summer EBT agency may draw 
Federal food benefit funds for the fiscal year.
    (c) USDA will respond to the interim and final POM, respectively, 
within 30 calendar days of receipt. If the plan initially submitted is 
not approved, the Summer EBT agency and USDA will collaborate to ensure 
changes to the plan are submitted for approval.
    (d) At any time after approval, the Summer EBT agency may amend an 
interim or final POM to reflect changes. The Summer EBT agency must 
submit the amendments to USDA for approval. The amendments must be 
signed by the Summer EBT agency-designated official responsible for 
ensuring that the Program is operated in accordance with the POM.
    (e) Summer EBT agencies must include the following in their final 
POM, at a minimum:
    (1) A copy of the inter-agency written agreement between the Summer 
EBT coordinating agency and each partnering agency that outlines the 
roles and responsibilities of each as required in Sec.  292.3(e) if 
applicable.
    (2) An estimate of the number of participants who will be served 
for the coming year.
    (3) The administrative budget on behalf of the State's or ITO's 
entire program operations which reflects the comprehensive needs of the 
Summer EBT agencies and local education agencies. The budget must 
include the Summer EBT agency's plan to comply with any standards 
prescribed by the Secretary for the use of these funds, as well as an 
expenditure plan reflecting planned administrative cost requirements 
for the year. Should administrative fund needs change, an amended 
expenditure plan is required.
    (4) A plan for timely and effective action against program 
violators.
    (5) A plan to comply with the Summer EBT agency requirements in 
Sec. Sec.  292.12 through 292.14.
    (6) A plan to ensure that Summer EBT benefits are issued to 
children based on their enrollment at the end of the instructional year 
immediately preceding each summer.
    (7) A description of enrollment procedures including, but not 
limited to, applications, NSLP enrollment database, direct verification 
and verification, as applicable.
    (8) The plan to coordinate with an ITO Summer EBT Program or State 
Summer EBT Program, as applicable, in accordance with Sec.  292.9.
    (9) The procedures to detect and prevent dual participation 
including a child simultaneously receiving benefits from more than one 
Summer EBT Program, or simultaneously receiving multiple allotments 
from the same State or ITO-administered Summer EBT Program as required 
in Sec.  292.9(b)(3).
    (10) A description of the issuance process including:
    (i) The start and end dates of the summer operational period;
    (ii) Date(s) when benefits will be issued;
    (iii) Benefit issuance dates for LEAs operating on a continuous 
school calendar, as applicable;
    (iv) Whether benefits will be added to an existing EBT card or 
other mobile payment instrument used to deliver SNAP or WIC benefits 
or, instead, whether benefits will be issued on a unique Summer EBT 
card or instrument;
    (v) Whether benefits will be issued to each eligible child or to 
households, as applicable;
    (vi) How the Summer EBT agency will provide access to households 
experiencing homelessness and other vulnerable populations; and
    (vii) Claims procedures in cases of erroneous payments in 
accordance with requirements at Sec.  292.16(g).
    (11) Customer service plans including:
    (i) A single point of contact for all customer service information 
and inquiries including a hotline and website;
    (ii) How eligible households will be informed of the availability 
of program benefits and the process to apply for benefits, if 
necessary; and
    (iii) A simplified process for households to opt out of the 
program.
    (12) A copy of the fair hearing procedure for participants.
    (f) In addition to the items listed in paragraph (e) of this 
section, an ITO

[[Page 90362]]

Summer EBT agency must include in its POM:
    (1) The service area of the ITO, a map or other visual reference 
aid, and a description of any Tribal areas outside of the ITO's 
jurisdiction that they propose to serve;
    (2) A plan and procedures to enroll children already deemed 
eligible by a State Summer EBT agency serving the same geographic area, 
without further application;
    (3) A plan and procedures to determine eligibility for and enroll 
children who must apply through the ITO Summer EBT agency to receive 
benefits because they have not already been identified as eligible, 
e.g., by a State Summer EBT agency serving the same geographic area. 
The ITO Summer EBT agency must use the eligibility criteria under Sec.  
292.6;
    (4) A description of the benefit delivery model to be used. The ITO 
Summer EBT agency may use a cash-value benefit (CVB) model, a food 
package model, a combination of the two, or an alternate model. The ITO 
Summer EBT agency must use the same benefit model for all participants 
throughout its service area;
    (i) For ITOs using a CVB-only benefit delivery model, a description 
of how the benefit level equal to the amount set forth in Sec.  
292.15(e); or
    (ii) For ITOs using a food package benefit delivery model, a 
combination CVB and food package benefit delivery model, or an 
alternate benefit delivery model, a description of how the benefit 
level will not exceed the amount set forth in Sec.  292.15(e);
    (5) The list of supplemental foods for which participants can 
transact upon enrollment, excluding infant formula and infant foods;
    (6) Procedures for enrolling applicable vendors to transact and 
redeem Summer EBT Program benefits. As a prerequisite, such vendors 
must be approved for participation in the WIC Program;
    (7) A plan for providing technical assistance and training to 
vendors enrolled to transact and redeem Summer EBT Program benefits; 
and
    (8) A plan for vendor integrity and monitoring, pursuant to Sec.  
292.19.


Sec.  292.9  Coordination between State-administered and ITO-
administered Summer EBT Programs.

    (a) The ITO Summer EBT agency must receive priority consideration 
to serve eligible individuals within its service area, as identified in 
its FNS-approved Plan for Operations and Management (POM) per Sec.  
292.8.
    (b) An ITO Summer EBT agency and State Summer EBT agency serving 
proximate geographic areas must coordinate Summer EBT Program services, 
which may include a written agreement between both parties. ITO Summer 
EBT agency and State Summer EBT agency coordination must, at minimum, 
include the following:
    (1) The State Summer EBT agency must share data, including 
household contact information, indicating those individuals deemed 
eligible in the ITO Summer EBT agency's service area in a manner and 
timeframe that will allow the ITO Summer EBT agency to issue program 
benefits timely;
    (2) The ITO Summer EBT agency and the State Summer EBT agency must 
each provide notice to eligible individuals or households that they may 
choose to receive Summer EBT Program benefits from either Summer EBT 
agency, in addition to referral information upon individual or 
household request; and
    (3) The ITO Summer EBT agency and State Summer EBT agency must 
coordinate to detect and prevent dual participation in the same summer 
operational period when serving proximate service areas in accordance 
with Sec.  292.15(d). For all student data exchanged applicable to the 
Summer EBT Program, the ITO Summer EBT agency and State Summer EBT 
agency must ensure the confidentiality of such data and data must only 
be used for program purposes in accordance with Sec.  292.13(o).
    (c) Eligible households choosing to participate in either the ITO-
operated Summer EBT Program or the State-operated Summer EBT Program 
must participate in the same program for the duration of the summer 
operational period in any given year.


Sec.  292.10  Coordinated Services Plan.

    (a) Each State Summer EBT agency must establish, and update 
annually as needed, a plan to coordinate the statewide availability of 
services offered through the Summer EBT Program described in this part 
and the Summer Food Service Program established in 7 CFR part 225. Each 
ITO Summer EBT agency is encouraged to develop a plan coordinating 
summer services available to the children and households they serve.
    (b) Only one plan must be established for each State in which both 
the Summer Food Service Program and the Summer EBT Program is 
administered. If more than one agency administers the Summer Food 
Service Program and Summer EBT within a respective State, they must 
work together to develop and implement the plan. States should also 
ensure that plans include the National School Lunch Program's Seamless 
Summer Program if appropriate.
    (c) The plan must include, at minimum, the following information:
    (1) A description of the roles and responsibilities of each Summer 
Food Service Program and Summer EBT agency, and, as applicable, any 
other agencies, ITOs, or public or private organizations which will be 
involved in administering the Programs;
    (2) A description of how the Summer EBT agency and any other 
organizations included in the plan will coordinate outreach and 
programmatic activities to maximize the reach of the Summer Food 
Service Program and Summer EBT Program; metrics to assess program reach 
and coverage; and
    (3) The Summer EBT agency's plans to partner with other Federal, 
State, Tribal, or local programs to aid participants in accessing all 
Federal, State, Tribal, or local programs for which they are eligible.
    (d) States must notify the public about their plan and make it 
available to the public through a website, and should, to the maximum 
extent practicable, solicit and consider input on plan development and 
implementation from other State agencies, ITOs, and local agencies; 
organizations involved in the administration of nutrition and human 
services programs; participants; and other stakeholders.
    (e) States must consult with FNS on the development of and any 
significant subsequent updates to their plan. Initial plans must be 
submitted to FNS no later than January 1, 2025. States must submit 
updates annually when significant changes are made to the plan, and 
otherwise no less than every 3 years.


Sec.  292.11  Advance Planning Document (APD) processes.

    (a) APD process for State agencies and ITOs. As a condition for the 
initial and continued ability to claim Federal financial participation 
(FFP) for the costs of the planning, development, acquisition, 
installation, and implementation of Information System (IS) equipment 
and services used in the administration of the Summer EBT Program, 
Summer EBT agencies must adhere to the APD process in this section (see 
guidance in Food and Nutrition Service's (FNS' Handbook 901 for more 
information), the State Systems APD process in paragraph (b) of this 
section, and for SNAP and WIC ITOs the existing APD process 
requirements for Management Information Systems and/or Information 
Systems as outlined in 7 CFR parts 246, 274, and 277, respectively. 
Summer EBT Projects have

[[Page 90363]]

the option to include the Summer EBT Program in an existing SNAP or WIC 
EBT APD or to create a separate APD specific to Summer EBT services. 
Where the Summer EBT agency is a SNAP or WIC agency, changes to the 
Management Information System to support Summer EBT follow the APD 
processes as outlined in Sec. Sec.  246.12 and 277.18 of this chapter 
(see guidance within FNS' Handbook 901 for more information). Child 
Nutrition Programs do not have a similar requirement for Management 
Information Systems, so the APD requirements will only apply the EBT 
services projects associated with the Summer EBT Program.
    (b) APD process for States. Requirements for FNS prior approval of 
IS projects--
    (1) For the acquisition of IS equipment or services to be utilized 
in an EBT system regardless of the cost of the acquisition in 
accordance with the Summer EBT issuance standards (subpart D of this 
part). For Summer EBT agencies that administer SNAP and are planning 
changes to their SNAP information systems to incorporate the Summer EBT 
requirements, refer to Sec.  277.18 of this chapter.
    (2) Specific prior approval requirements. (i) For IS projects which 
require prior approval, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this 
section, the State Summer EBT agency must obtain the prior written 
approval of USDA for:
    (A) Conducting planning activities, entering into contractual 
agreements or making any other commitment for acquiring the necessary 
planning services for the development of an initial Summer EBT services 
project; and
    (B) Conducting design, development, testing or implementation 
activities, entering into contractual agreements or making any other 
commitment for the acquisition of IS equipment or services.
    (ii) For IS equipment and services acquisitions requiring prior 
approval as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, prior 
approval of the following documents associated with such acquisitions 
is also required:
    (A) Requests for Proposals (RFPs). Unless specifically exempted by 
FNS, the State Summer EBT agency must obtain prior written approval of 
the RFP before the RFP may be released. The State Summer EBT agency 
must obtain prior written approval from FNS for RFPs which are 
associated with an EBT system regardless of the cost.
    (B) Contracts. All contracts must be submitted to FNS. The State 
Summer EBT agency must obtain prior written approval from FNS for 
contracts which are associated with an EBT system regardless of the 
cost.
    (C) Contract amendments. All contract amendments must be submitted 
to FNS. Unless specifically exempted by FNS, the State Summer EBT 
agency must obtain prior written approval from FNS of any contract 
amendments which cumulatively exceed 20 percent of the base contract 
costs before being signed by the State Summer EBT agency.
    (3) Procurement requirements. (i) Procurements of IS equipment and 
services are subject to Sec.  277.14 of this chapter (procurement 
standards) regardless of any conditions for prior approval contained in 
this section, except the requirements of Sec.  277.14(b)(1) and (2) of 
this chapter regarding review of proposed contracts. The procurement 
standards in Sec.  277.14(b)(1) and (2) include a requirement for 
maximum practical open and free competition regardless of whether the 
procurement is formally advertised or negotiated.
    (ii) The standards prescribed by Sec.  277.14 of this chapter, as 
well as the requirement for prior approval in this paragraph (b), apply 
to IS services and equipment acquired primarily to support Summer EBT 
regardless of the acquiring entity.
    (iii) The competitive procurement policy prescribed by Sec.  277.14 
of this chapter must be applicable except for IS services provided by 
the agency itself, or by other State or local agencies.
    (iv) The following FNS-required provisions as required under 2 CFR 
part 200, appendix II, apply to Summer EBT procurements as well:
    (A) Compliance with Executive Order 11246 related to equal 
employment opportunity.
    (B) Compliance with Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q).
    (C) Compliance with Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387).
    (D) Compliance with Anti-Lobbying Act.
    (E) Compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act.
    (F) Compliance with drug-free workplace requirements.
    (G) Compliance with suspension/debarment requirements.
    (H) USDA has royalty-free rights to use software and documentation 
developed.
    (I) The State Summer EBT agency must obtain prior written approval 
from FNS, as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section, to 
claim and receive reimbursement for the associated costs of the IS 
acquisition.
    (4) Document submission requirements. (i) For IS projects requiring 
prior approval as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this 
section, the State Summer EBT agency must submit the following 
documents to FNS for approval:
    (A) Planning APD as described in Sec.  292.2.
    (B) Implementation APD as described in Sec.  292.2.
    (C) Annual APDU as described in Sec.  292.2 for the initial Summer 
EBT implementation.
    (ii) The Annual APDU must be submitted to FNS 60 days prior to the 
expiration of the FFP approval, unless the submission date is 
specifically altered by USDA. In years where an As Needed APDU is 
required, as described in Sec.  292.2, FNS may waive or modify the 
requirement to submit the annual APDU. The requirement in this 
paragraph (b)(4)(ii) will only apply to the initial implementation of 
Summer EBT.
    (iii) As Needed APDU as described in Sec.  292.2. As Needed APDU 
are required to obtain a commitment of FFP whenever significant project 
changes occur. Significant project changes are defined as changes in 
cost, schedule, scope or strategy which exceed FNS-defined thresholds 
or triggers. Without such approval, the Summer EBT agency is at risk 
for funding of project activities which are not in compliance with the 
terms and conditions of the approved APD and subsequently approved APDU 
until such time as approval is specifically granted by FNS.
    (iv) Acquisition documents as described in Sec.  277.14(g) of this 
chapter for Summer EBT agencies that administer SNAP (see guidance 
within in FNS Handbook 901 for more information), or for Summer EBT 
services projects utilizing an existing or new SNAP EBT services 
contract for Summer EBT.
    (v) Emergency acquisition requests as described in paragraph (j) of 
this section.
    (c) Prior approval. The State Summer EBT agency must obtain prior 
FNS approval of the documents specified in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this 
section in order to claim and receive reimbursement for the associated 
costs of the IS acquisition.
    (d) Approval by the State Summer EBT agency. Approval by the State 
Summer EBT agency is required for all documents and acquisitions 
specified in this subpart prior to submission for FNS approval. 
However, the State Summer EBT agency may delegate approval authority to 
any subordinate entity for those acquisitions of IS equipment and 
services not requiring prior approval by FNS.

[[Page 90364]]

    (e) Prompt action on requests for prior approval. FNS will reply 
promptly to State Summer EBT agency requests for prior approval. If FNS 
has not provided written approval, disapproval, or a request for 
additional information within 60 days of FNS' acknowledgment of receipt 
of the State Summer EBT agency's request, the request will be deemed to 
have provisionally met the prior approval requirement in paragraph (b) 
of this section. However, provisional approval will not exempt a State 
Summer EBT agency from having to meet all other Federal requirements 
which pertain to the acquisition of IS equipment and services. Such 
requirements remain subject to Federal audit and review.
    (f) APD content requirements--(1) Planning APD (PAPD). The PAPD is 
a written plan of action to acquire proposed services or equipment and 
to perform necessary activities to investigate the feasibility, system 
alternatives, requirements and resources needed to replace, modify, or 
upgrade the State Summer EBT agency's IS. The PAPD must contain 
adequate documentation to demonstrate the need to undertake a planning 
process, as well as a thorough description of the proposed planning 
activities, and estimated costs and timeline (see guidance within FNS' 
Handbook 901 for more information).
    (2) Implementation APD (IAPD). The IAPD is a written plan of action 
to acquire the proposed IS services or equipment and to perform 
necessary activities to design, develop, acquire, install, test, and 
implement the new IS. The IAPD must contain detailed documentation of 
planning and preparedness for the proposed project, (see guidance 
within FNS' Handbook 901 for more information), demonstrating the 
feasibility of the project, thorough analysis of system requirements 
and design, a rigorous management approach, stewardship of Federal 
funds, a realistic schedule and budget, and preliminary plans for key 
project phases. The IAPD must be submitted and approved prior to 
incurring any costs under the new EBT service contract.
    (3) Annual APDU content requirements. The Annual APDU is a yearly 
update to ongoing IS projects when planning or implementation 
activities occur. The Annual APDU must contain documentation on the 
project activity status and a description of major tasks, milestones, 
budget, and any changes (see guidance within FNS' Handbook 901 for more 
information).
    (4) As Needed APDU content requirements.
    The As Needed APDU document must contain the items as defined in 
paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this section with emphasis on the area(s) where 
changes have occurred or are anticipated that triggered the submission 
of the APDU (see guidance within FNS' Handbook 901 for more 
information).''
    Paragraph (d) should read: (q) APD process for ITOs. For the 
acquisition of IS equipment or services to be utilized in an EBT system 
regardless of the cost of the acquisition in accordance with the Summer 
EBT issuance standards in subpart D to this part, WIC EBT coordinating 
Summer EBT agencies, administering WIC, that are planning changes to 
their ITO Management Information Systems to incorporate the Summer EBT 
requirements should refer to the APD process requirements outlined in 7 
CFR 246.12, 2 CFR part 200, appendix XI, and the APD process in this 
section (see guidance within FNS' Handbook 901 for more information).
    (g) Service agreements. (1) The State Summer EBT agency must 
execute service agreements when IS services are to be provided by a 
State central IT facility or another State or local agency. Service 
agreement means the document signed by the State or local agency and 
the State or local central IT facility whenever an IT facility provides 
IT services to the State or local agency. Service agreements must:
    (i) Identify the IS services that will be provided;
    (ii) Include a schedule of rates for each identified IS service, 
and a certification that these rates apply equally to all users;
    (iii) Include a description of the method(s) of accounting for the 
services rendered under the agreement and computing services charges;
    (iv) Include assurances that services provided will be timely and 
satisfactory;
    (v) Include assurances that information in the IS as well as 
access, use and disposal of IS data will be safeguarded in accordance 
with provisions of Sec. Sec.  272.1(c) (disclosure) and 277.13 
(property) of this chapter;
    (vi) Require the provider to obtain prior approval from FNS 
pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section for IS equipment and IS 
services that are acquired from commercial sources primarily to support 
federally aided public assistance programs and require the provider to 
comply with Sec.  277.14 of this chapter (procurement standards) for 
procurements related to the service agreement. IS equipment and 
services are considered to be primarily acquired to support federally 
aided public assistance programs when the Programs may reasonably be 
expected to either be billed for more than 50 percent of the total 
charges made to all users of the IS equipment and services during the 
time period covered by the service agreement, or directly charged for 
the total cost of the purchase or lease of IS equipment or services;
    (vii) Include the beginning and ending dates of the period of time 
covered by the service agreement; and
    (viii) Include a schedule of expected total charges to the Program 
for the period of the service agreement.
    (2) The State Summer EBT agency must maintain a copy of each 
service agreement in its files for Federal review upon request.
    (h) Basis for continued Federal financial participation (FFP)--(1) 
General. FNS will continue FFP at the levels approved in the Planning 
APD and the Implementation APD provided that project development 
proceeds in accordance with the conditions and terms of the approved 
APD and that IS resources are used for the purposes authorized. FNS 
will use the APDU to monitor IS project development. The submission of 
the update as prescribed in paragraph (b)(4) of this section for the 
duration of project development is a condition for continued FFP. In 
addition, periodic onsite reviews of IS project development and State 
and local agency IS operations may be conducted by or for FNS to assure 
compliance with approved APDs, proper use of IS resources, and the 
adequacy of State or local agency IS operations.
    (2) Pre-implementation. The State Summer EBT agency must 
demonstrate through thorough testing that the system meets all program 
functional and performance requirements. FNS may require a pre-
implementation review of the system to validate system functionality 
prior to Summer EBT agency testing.
    (3) Testing. The State Summer EBT agency must commit to completing 
and submitting the following documents for FNS approval and obtaining 
such approval prior to issuance of benefits to eligible households in 
the project area:
    (i) Functional demonstration. A functional demonstration of the 
functional requirements prescribed in this part in combination with the 
system components described by the approved system design is 
recommended in order to identify and resolve any problems prior to 
acceptance testing. The Department reserves the right to participate in 
the functional demonstration if one is conducted. FNS may require that 
any or all of these tests be repeated in instances where significant 
modifications are made to

[[Page 90365]]

the system after these tests are initially completed or if problems 
that surfaced during initial testing warrant a retest.
    (ii) An Acceptance Test Plan. The Acceptance Test Plan for the 
project must describe the methodology to be utilized to verify that the 
EBT system complies with Program requirements and System Design 
specifications. At a minimum, the Acceptance Test Plan must address:
    (A) The types of testing to be performed;
    (B) The organization of the test team and associated 
responsibilities, test database generation, test case development, test 
schedule, and the documentation of test results. Acceptance testing 
must include functional requirements testing, error condition handling 
and destructive testing, security testing, recovery testing, controls 
testing, stress and throughput performance testing, and regression 
testing; and
    (C) A ``what-if'' component must also be included to permit the 
opportunity for observers and participants to test possible scenarios 
in a free-form manner.
    (iii) Independent testing. The Department reserves the right to 
participate and conduct independent testing as necessary during the 
acceptance testing and appropriate events during system design, 
development, implementation, and operation.
    (iv) An acceptance test report. The State Summer EBT agency must 
provide a separate report after the completion of the acceptance test 
only in instances where FNS is not present at the testing or when 
serious problems are uncovered during the testing that remain 
unresolved by the end of the test session. The report must summarize 
the activities, describe any discrepancies, describe the proposed 
solutions to discrepancies, and the timetable for their retesting and 
completion. In addition, the report must contain the State Summer EBT 
agency's recommendations regarding implementation of the EBT system.
    (v) A prototype food retailer agreement. The State Summer EBT 
agency must enter an agreement with each FNS authorized retailer that 
complies with the requirements under Sec.  274.3 of this chapter.
    (vi) An implementation plan. (A) The implementation plan must 
include the following:
    (1) A description of the tools, procedures, detailed schedules, and 
resources needed to implement the project;
    (2) The equipment acquisition and installation requirements, 
ordering schedules, and system and component testing;
    (3) A phase-in-strategy which permits a measured and orderly 
transition from one EBT system to another. In describing this strategy, 
the plan must address schedules that avoid disruption of normal 
shopping patterns and operations of participating children and food 
retailers. Training of Summer EBT eligible children, State Summer EBT 
agency personnel and retailers and/or their trainers must be 
coordinated with the installation of equipment in retail stores;
    (4) A description of on-going tasks associated with fine-tuning the 
system and making any corrective actions necessary to meet contractual 
requirements. The description must also address those tasks associated 
with ongoing training, document updates, equipment maintenance, on-site 
support and system adjustments, as needed to meet Program requirements; 
and,
    (5) A plan for orderly phase-out of the project and/or for 
continuing benefit issuance operations if it is demonstrated during the 
pilot project or conversion operations that the new system is not 
acceptable.
    (B) The State Summer EBT agency must submit a written contingency 
plan for FNS approval. The contingency plan must contain information 
regarding the back-up issuance system that will be activated in the 
event of an emergency shut-down which results in short-term or extended 
system inaccessibility, or total discontinuation of EBT system 
operations. The contingency plan must be incorporated into the Summer 
EBT State system security plan after FNS approval as specified in 
paragraph (p) of this section.
    (i) Disallowance of Federal financial participation (FFP). If FNS 
finds that any acquisition approved under the provisions of paragraph 
(b) of this section fails to comply with the criteria, requirements and 
other undertakings described in the approved or modified APD, payment 
of FFP may be suspended or may be disallowed in whole or in part.
    (j) Emergency acquisition requirements. The State Summer EBT agency 
may request FFP for the costs of IS equipment and services acquired to 
meet emergency situations in which the agency can demonstrate to FNS an 
immediate need to acquire IS equipment or services in order to continue 
operation of Summer EBT; and the State Summer EBT agency can clearly 
document that the need could not have been anticipated or planned for 
and precludes the State from following the prior approval requirements 
of paragraph (c) of this section. FNS may provide FFP in emergency 
situations if the following conditions are met:
    (1) The State Summer EBT agency must submit a written request to 
FNS prior to the acquisition of any IS equipment or services. The 
written request must include:
    (i) A brief description of the IS equipment and/or services to be 
acquired and an estimate of their costs;
    (ii) A brief description of the circumstances which result in the 
State Summer EBT agency's need to proceed with the acquisition prior to 
fulfilling approval requirements at paragraph (c) of this section; and
    (iii) A description of the adverse impact which would result if the 
State Summer EBT agency does not immediately acquire the IS equipment 
and/or services.
    (2) Upon receipt of a written request for emergency acquisition FNS 
must provide a written response to the State Summer EBT agency within 
14 days. The FNS response must:
    (i) Inform the State Summer EBT agency that the request has been 
disapproved and the reason for disapproval.
    (ii) If FNS approves the request submitted under paragraph (j)(1) 
of this section, FFP will be available from the date the State Summer 
EBT agency acquires the IS equipment and services.
    (iii) FNS recognizes that an emergency situation exists and grants 
conditional approval pending receipt of the State Summer EBT agency's 
formal submission of the IAPD information specified at paragraph (b)(4) 
of this section within 90 days from the date of the agency's initial 
written request.
    (iv) If the complete IAPD submission required by paragraph (b)(2) 
of this section is not received by FNS within 90 days from the date of 
the initial written request, costs may be subject to disallowance.
    (k) General cost requirements--(1) Cost determination. Actual costs 
must be determined in compliance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and 
USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415 and an FNS 
approved budget and must be reconcilable with the approved FNS funding 
level. A State Summer EBT agency must not claim reimbursement for costs 
charged to any other Federal program or uses of IS systems for purposes 
not connected with Summer EBT. The approved APD cost allocation plan 
includes the methods which will be used to identify and classify costs 
to be claimed. This methodology must be submitted to FNS

[[Page 90366]]

as part of the request for FNS approval of funding as required in this 
section. Operational costs are to be allocated based on the statewide 
cost allocation plan rather than the APD cost plan. Approved cost 
allocation plans for ongoing operational costs must not apply to IS 
system development costs under this section unless documentation 
required under paragraph (b) of this section is submitted to and 
approvals are obtained from FNS. Any APD-related costs approved by FNS 
must be excluded in determining the Summer EBT agency's administrative 
costs under any other section of this part.
    (2) Cost identification for purposes of FFP claims. State Summer 
EBT agencies must assign and claim the costs incurred under an approved 
APD in accordance with the following criteria:
    (i) Development costs. Using its normal departmental accounting 
system, in accordance with the cost principles set forth in 2 CFR part 
200, subpart E, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 
and 415, the State Summer EBT agency must specifically identify what 
items of costs constitute development costs, assign these costs to 
specific project cost centers, and distribute these costs to funding 
sources based on the specific identification, assignment and 
distribution outlined in the approved APD. The methods for distributing 
costs set forth in the APD should provide for assigning identifiable 
costs, to the extent practicable, directly to program/functions. The 
State Summer EBT agency must amend the cost allocation plan required by 
2 CFR part 200, subpart E, to include the approved APD methodology for 
the identification, assignment, and distribution of the development 
costs.
    (ii) Operational costs. Costs incurred for the operation of an IS 
must be identified and assigned by the State Summer EBT agency to 
funding sources in accordance with the approved cost allocation plan 
required by 2 CFR part 200, subpart E.
    (iii) Service agreement costs. States that operate a central data 
processing facility must use their approved central service cost 
allocation plan required by 2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and USDA 
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415 to identify and 
assign costs incurred under service agreements with the State Summer 
EBT agency. The State Summer EBT agency must then distribute these 
costs to funding sources in accordance with the development and 
operational costs outlined in this section.
    (iv) Claiming costs. Prior to claiming funding under this section 
the State Summer EBT agency must have complied with the requirements 
for obtaining approval and prior approval of paragraph (b) of this 
section.
    (v) Budget authority. FNS approval of requests for funding must 
provide notification to the State Summer EBT agency of the budget 
authority and dollar limitations under which such funding may be 
claimed. FNS must provide this amount as a total authorization for such 
funding which may not be exceeded unless amended by FNS. FNS's 
determination of the amount of this authorization must be based on the 
budget submitted by the State Summer EBT agency. Activities not 
included in the approved budget, as well as continuation of approved 
activities beyond scheduled deadlines in the approved plan, must 
require FNS approval of an As Needed APDU as prescribed in paragraphs 
(b)(4) and (f)(4) of this section, including an amended State budget. 
Requests to amend the budget authorization approved by FNS must be 
submitted to FNS prior to claiming such expenses.
    (l) Access to the system and records. Access to the system in all 
aspects, including but not limited to design, development, and 
operation, including work performed by any source, and including cost 
records of contractors and subcontractors, must be made available by 
the State Summer EBT agency to FNS or its authorized representatives at 
intervals as are deemed necessary by FNS, in order to determine whether 
the conditions for approval are being met and to determine the 
efficiency, economy and effectiveness of the system. Failure to provide 
full access to all parts of the system may result in suspension and/or 
termination of Summer EBT funds for the costs of the system and its 
operation.
    (m) Ownership rights. The State Summer EBT agency must comply with 
the requirements under this part and the requirement for intangible 
property in 2 CFR 200.315.
    (n) Software. (1) The State or local government must include a 
clause in all procurement instruments which provides that the State or 
local government must have all ownership rights in any software or 
modifications thereof and associated documentation designed, developed, 
or installed with FFP under this section.
    (2) FNS reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable 
license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use and to authorize others 
to use for Federal Government purposes, such software, modifications, 
and documentation.
    (3) Proprietary operating/vendor software packages which meet the 
definition of COTS in Sec.  292.2 must not be subject to the ownership 
provisions in paragraph (m) of this section. FFP is not available for 
development costs for proprietary application software developed 
specifically for Summer EBT.
    (o) Information Systems equipment. The policies and procedures 
governing title, use and disposition of property purchased with FFP, 
which appear at 2 CFR 200.315 are applicable to IS equipment.
    (p) Information system security requirements and review process-(1) 
Information system security requirements. State and local agencies are 
responsible for the security of all IS projects under development, and 
operational systems involved in the administration of Summer EBT. State 
and local agencies must determine appropriate IS security requirements 
based on recognized industry standards or compliance with standards 
governing security of Federal information systems and information 
processing.
    (2) Information security program. State Summer EBT agencies must 
implement and maintain a comprehensive Security Program for IS and 
installations involved in the administration of the Summer EBT. 
Security Programs must include the following components:
    (i) Determination and implementation of appropriate security 
requirements as prescribed in paragraph (p)(1) of this section.
    (ii) Establishment of a security plan and, as appropriate, policies 
and procedures to address the following areas of IS security:
    (A) Physical security of IS resources;
    (B) Equipment security to protect equipment from theft and 
unauthorized use;
    (C) Software and data security;
    (D) Telecommunications security;
    (E) Personnel security;
    (F) Contingency plans to meet critical processing needs in the 
event of short- or long-term interruption of service;
    (G) Emergency preparedness; and
    (H) Designation of an Agency IS Security Manager.
    (3) Periodic risk analyses. State Summer EBT agencies must 
establish and maintain a program for conducting periodic risk analyses 
to ensure that appropriate, cost-effective safeguards are incorporated 
into new and existing systems. In addition, risk analyses must be 
performed whenever significant system changes occur.
    (4) IS security reviews. State Summer EBT agencies must review the 
security

[[Page 90367]]

of IS involved in the administration of Summer EBT on a biennial basis. 
At a minimum, the reviews must include an evaluation of physical and 
data security, operating procedures and personnel practices. State 
Summer EBT agencies must maintain reports of their biennial IS security 
reviews, together with pertinent supporting documentation, for Federal 
review upon request.
    (5) Applicability. The security requirements of this section apply 
to all IS systems used by State and local governments to administer 
Summer EBT.
    (q) APD process for ITOs. For the acquisition of IS equipment or 
services to be utilized in an EBT system regardless of the cost of the 
acquisition in accordance with the Summer EBT issuance standards in 
subpart D of this part, WIC EBT coordinating Summer EBT agencies, 
administering WIC, that are planning changes to their ITO Management 
Information Systems to incorporate the Summer EBT requirements should 
refer to the APD process requirements outlined in 7 CFR 246.12, 2 CFR 
part 200, appendix XI, and the APD process (see guidance within FNS' 
Handbook 901 for more information).
    (r) ITO EBT management and reporting. (1) The Summer EBT agency 
must follow the Department APD requirements in this section and submit 
Planning and Implementation APDs and appropriate updates, for 
Department approval, for planning, development, and implementation of 
initial and subsequent EBT systems.
    (2) If an ITO plans to incorporate additional programs in its EBT 
system, the ITO must consult with ITO officials responsible for 
administering the programs prior to submitting the Planning APD (PAPD) 
document and include the outcome of those discussions in the PAPD 
submission to the Department for approval.
    (3) Annually as part of the State plan, the Summer EBT agency must 
submit EBT project status reports. At a minimum, the annual status 
report must contain:
    (i) Any information on future EBT changes and procurement updates 
affecting present operations; and
    (ii) Such other information the Secretary may require.
    (4) The ITO must be responsible for EBT coordination and management 
for planning, implementation and ongoing operations of Summer EBT.
    (s) ITO Summer EBT procurements. The following procurement 
requirements from title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations apply to 
ITO Summer EBT agencies:
    (1) 2 CFR 200.315;
    (2) 2 CFR 200.317;
    (3) 2 CFR 200.326;
    (4) 2 CFR part 200, appendix II:
    (i) Remedies for violation or breach;
    (ii) Termination for cause and for convenience;
    (iii) Equal employment opportunity (EEO) provisions;
    (iv) Clean Air Act and Federal Water Pollution Control Act;
    (v) Debarment and suspension requirements; and
    (vi) Anti-lobbying requirements; and
    (5) 2 CFR part 400.
    (t) ITO Program costs. (1) The two kinds of allowable costs under 
the Program are ``food costs'' and ``nutrition services and 
administration costs.'' In general, costs necessary to the fulfillment 
of Program objectives are to be considered allowable costs. The two 
types of nutrition services and administration costs are:
    (i) Direct costs. Those direct costs that are allowable under 2 CFR 
part 200, subpart E, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 
400 and 415.
    (ii) Indirect costs. Those indirect costs that are allowable under 
2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR 
parts 400 and 415. When computing indirect costs, food costs may not be 
used in the base to which the indirect cost rate is applied. In 
accordance with the provisions of 2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and USDA 
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415, a claim for 
indirect costs must be supported by an approved allocation plan for the 
determination of allowable indirect costs.
    (2) Program funds may not be used to pay for retroactive benefits.


Sec.  292.12  Enrolling eligible children.

    (a) Minimum requirements for Program informational activities. 
Summer EBT agencies must comply with the following minimum information 
requirements for applicants and recipients.
    (1) Summer EBT agencies must inform participant and applicant 
households of their Program rights and responsibilities. This 
information may be provided through whatever means the Summer EBT 
agency deems appropriate.
    (2) All Program informational material must:
    (i) Be in an understandable and uniform format, and to the maximum 
extent practicable, in a language that parents and guardians can 
understand;
    (ii) Include the USDA nondiscrimination statement; and
    (iii) Be provided in alternate formats for individuals with 
disabilities, as practicable.
    (3) All program information material should be provided by 
households' preferred method of contact, to the maximum extent 
practicable.
    (b) General requirements. In enrolling eligible children, Summer 
EBT agencies must:
    (1) Establish procedures to ensure correct eligibility 
determinations;
    (2) Establish procedures to allow households to provide updated 
contact information for the purpose of receiving Summer EBT; and
    (3) Establish procedures to enable anyone who has been determined 
to be eligible for Summer EBT benefits to confirm their eligibility 
status and unenroll, or opt out, of the Program, if they do not want to 
receive benefits; and
    (4) Provide assistance to households that seek help in applying for 
benefits.
    (c) NSLP/SBP enrollment database. By 2025, Summer EBT agencies must 
establish and maintain a State- or ITO-wide database of all children 
enrolled in NSLP- or SBP-participating schools within the State or ITO 
service area, as applicable, for the purposes of enrolling children for 
Summer EBT benefits and detecting and preventing duplicate benefit 
issuance. If an ITO, in consultation with FNS, determines that 
establishing and maintaining a database meeting the requirements of 
this section is not feasible or is unnecessary based on their method of 
enrolling children, the ITO may submit a waiver request under Sec.  
292.3(h).
    (1) Database elements. At a minimum, the database must contain the 
following information for these children:
    (i) Name;
    (ii) Date of birth;
    (iii) School/school district where enrolled;
    (iv) Mailing address;
    (v) Individual free or reduced price eligibility status, as 
applicable; and
    (vi) Any other information needed to issue benefits timely and with 
integrity.
    (2) Data use and confidentiality. Summer EBT agencies must ensure 
the confidentiality of all such data, and the data must be used only 
for the purposes of the Summer EBT Program, or to provide other social 
service benefits to eligible children.
    (3) Data sharing across Summer EBT Programs. State Summer EBT 
agencies must make this data available to ITO Summer EBT agencies for 
children within an ITO's Summer EBT service area, in a timeframe that 
allows ITO Summer EBT agencies to issue timely benefits. ITO Summer EBT 
agencies must ensure confidentiality of the data in accordance with 
paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
    (d) Automatic enrollment with streamlined certification. (1) Summer

[[Page 90368]]

EBT agencies must enroll eligible children through streamlined 
certification, including those who, during the period of eligibility 
were:
    (i)(A) Individually certified for free or reduced price school 
meals through the NSLP/SBP, per Sec.  245.6 of this chapter; or
    (B) School aged and:
    (1) Members of a household receiving assistance under SNAP, as 
defined in Sec.  292.2;
    (2) Members of a household receiving assistance under FDPIR and 
TANF, if data for these programs are available at the State level; or
    (3) A foster, homeless, migrant, runaway, or Head Start child, as 
defined in Sec.  245.2 of this chapter, if data for these programs are 
available at the State level.
    (ii) Not enrolled in a special provision school but are otherwise 
determined eligible for a free or reduced priced meal through the NSLP/
SBP.
    (2) Summer EBT agency may enroll eligible children through 
streamlined certification who are members of a household receiving 
assistance under other means-tested programs, as approved by the 
Secretary.
    (3) Streamlined certification does not require further confirmation 
of school enrollment.
    (4) If an ITO, in consultation with FNS, determines that any 
element of automatic enrollment with streamlined certification is not 
feasible or is unnecessary based on available resources or 
circumstances to the population served, the ITO may submit a waiver 
request under Sec.  292.3(h).
    (e) Enrollment by Summer EBT application. (1) Summer EBT agencies 
must enroll eligible children in Summer EBT if it is determined that 
they meet the requirements to receive free or reduced price meals at 
Sec.  292.5(a), as determined through a complete Summer EBT 
application. A Summer EBT application is considered complete if the 
following information is provided:
    (i) Names of children and other household members;
    (ii) Amount, source, and frequency of income for each household 
member; and
    (iii) Signature of an adult household member, including electronic 
signatures, as described in Sec.  292.13(h).
    (2) Confirmation of enrollment in an NSLP/SBP- participating school 
during the immediately preceding instructional year is required for 
children who apply by Summer EBT application. This can be accomplished 
by matching against the State or ITO-wide NSLP/SBP enrollment database, 
as required in paragraph (c) of this section, prior to benefit 
issuance.
    (3) Children who are not in an NSLP or SBP-participating school in 
the immediately preceding instructional year cannot be certified as 
eligible, and therefore cannot be deemed eligible for Summer EBT 
through submission of an application for Summer EBT benefits.
    (4) Summer EBT agencies are prohibited from requiring income 
documentation at the time of application.
    (f) Notice of approval--(1) Income applications. The Summer EBT 
agency must notify (or place notification in the mail) eligible 
households of a child's approved status within 15 operational days of 
receipt of a complete application. This may be included in the mailing 
containing the EBT card, if applicable, or other communication 
informing the household about the issuance or use of benefits.
    (2) Streamlined certification. Households approved for benefits 
based on information provided by the appropriate State or local agency 
responsible for the administration of a means-tested program that has 
been approved by the Secretary must be notified, in writing, that their 
children are eligible for Summer EBT and that no application is 
required. The notice of approval must also inform the household how to 
opt-out if they do not want their children to receive Summer EBT 
benefits.
    (3) Households declining benefits. Children from households that 
notify the Summer EBT agency that they do not want Summer EBT benefits 
must not be issued benefits, or have their benefits expunged as soon as 
possible if already issued. Any notification from the household 
declining benefits must be documented and maintained on file, as 
required under Sec.  292.23, to substantiate the change in benefits. 
Because any expungement in this instance is at the request of the 
household, the 30 day household notice typically required for expunging 
benefits is not required in this instance.
    (4) Duplicate benefit issuance. Summer EBT agencies must include in 
the notice of approval a statement communicating that households that 
are erroneously issued duplicate benefits from more than one State or 
ITO should only use benefits from the State or ITO where their 
child(ren) completed the instructional year immediately preceding the 
summer operational period. Under no circumstances may they use both.
    (g) Denied applications and the notice of denial. When the 
application furnished by a household is not complete or does not meet 
the eligibility criteria for Summer EBT benefits, the Summer EBT agency 
must document and retain the reasons for ineligibility and must retain 
the denied application. In addition, the Summer EBT agency must provide 
written notice to each household denied benefits within 15 operational 
days of receipt of a complete application. At a minimum, this notice 
must include:
    (1) The specific reason or reasons for the denial of benefits, 
e.g., income in excess of allowable limits or incomplete application;
    (2) Notification of the right to appeal;
    (3) Instructions on how to appeal; and
    (4) A statement reminding households that they may reapply for 
benefits at any time.
    (h) Appeals of denied benefits. A household that wishes to appeal 
an application that was denied may do so in accordance with the 
procedures established by the Summer EBT agency as required by Sec.  
292.26. However, prior to initiating the hearing procedure, the 
household may request a conference to provide the opportunity for the 
household to discuss the situation, present information, and obtain an 
explanation of the data submitted in the application or the decision 
rendered. The request for a conference must not in any way prejudice or 
diminish the right to a fair hearing. The Summer EBT agency must 
promptly schedule a fair hearing, if requested.
    (i) Confidential nature of streamlined certification information. 
Information about children or their households obtained through the 
streamlined certification process must be kept confidential and is 
subject to the limitations on disclosure of information in section 9 of 
the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1758.


Sec.  292.13  Application requirements.

    (a) Statewide application. By 2025, the Summer EBT agency must make 
a Summer EBT application available to households whose children are 
enrolled in NSLP- or SBP-participating schools and who do not already 
have an individual eligibility determination.
    (b) Contracting application processes. Summer EBT agencies may not 
delegate to LEAs the responsibility of making a Summer EBT application 
available. However, a Summer EBT agency may contract with another 
entity into order to fulfill the requirement in this paragraph (b).
    (c) Household applications. The application must be clear and 
simple in design and the required information must be limited to what 
is required to

[[Page 90369]]

demonstrate that the household does, or does not, meet the eligibility 
criteria for Summer EBT benefits at Sec.  292.5(a). The application or 
associated instructions must also include the income eligibility 
guidelines and an explanation that households with incomes at or below 
the income limit may be eligible for Summer EBT. Summer EBT agencies 
are encouraged to include optional questions on the application to 
improve customer service including, but not limited to:
    (1) Preferred method of communication (e.g., mail, email, phone, 
text message);
    (2) Preferred contact information;
    (3) Preferred language of communication;
    (4) Preferred method of benefit issuance (e.g., EBT card, 
electronic benefit);
    (5) Interest in receiving information about how to access other 
assistance program benefits (e.g., Summer Food Service Program, NSLP/
SBP, Child and Adult Care Food Program, SNAP, WIC, TANF, FDPIR, 
Medicaid);
    (6) Membership in an ITO; and
    (7) Other program options where a household may have preferences, 
receipt of information that households may find useful, or information 
that would aid Summer EBT agencies in successful program 
implementation.
    (d) Understandable communications. Any communication with 
households for eligibility determination purposes must be in an 
understandable and uniform format and, to the maximum extent 
practicable, in a language that parents and guardians can understand.
    (e) Availability of applications. Summer EBT agencies must ensure 
that a Summer EBT application is available throughout the period of 
eligibility, as defined in Sec.  292.2.
    (f) Timely certifications. Summer EBT agencies must follow-up with 
a household that submits an incomplete application within 10 
operational days of receipt of the application. See notice of approval 
at Sec.  292.12(f) for additional requirements for complete 
applications that are approved for benefits, and providing benefits to 
participants at Sec.  292.15(c) for requirements around timely issuance 
of benefits for eligible children.
    (g) Deadline for applications. Households must submit an 
application for Summer EBT benefits by the last day of the summer 
operational period in order to receive benefits for that summer. 
Applications that are submitted after the last day of the summer 
operational period may be used to establish eligibility for the 
following summer. Summer EBT agencies may encourage households to apply 
prior to the application deadline, however applications must be 
accepted and processed up until the application deadline, and benefits 
must be issued if the application is approved.
    (h) Electronic applications. In addition to the distribution of 
information, applications, and descriptive materials in paper form, the 
Summer EBT agency may establish a system for executing household 
applications electronically and using electronic signatures. The 
electronic submission system must comply with the same requirements as 
paper applications. Descriptive materials may also be made available 
electronically by the Summer EBT or local educational agency. If the 
application is made available electronically, a paper version must also 
be available.
    (i) Application content requirements. Summer EBT applications must 
contain the following elements:
    (1) Required income information. The information requested on the 
application with respect to the current income of the household must be 
limited to:
    (i) The income received by each member identified by the household 
member who received the income or an indication which household members 
had no income; and
    (ii) The source of the income (such as earnings, wages, welfare, 
pensions, support payments, unemployment compensation, social security 
and other cash income). Other cash income includes cash amounts 
received or withdrawn from any source, including savings, investments, 
trust accounts, and other resources which are available to pay for a 
child's meals.
    (2) Household members. The application must require applicants to 
provide the names of all household members. However, the application 
must allow the household to provide a case number if they participate 
in SNAP, or another means-tested program that has been approved by the 
Secretary, in lieu of names of all household members and household 
income information.
    (3) Name of school where child is enrolled. A State- or ITO-wide 
application must contain a space for the household to indicate the name 
of the school or district where each eligible child is enrolled.
    (4) Mailing address. The application must contain a space for the 
household to list their mailing address. However, the application must 
be accepted and processed as complete even if the field was not 
completed by the applicant. The instructions should communicate that it 
will be used to mail their EBT card, as applicable, and therefore 
should be the address that will be used by the household at the time 
the Summer EBT agency issues benefits.
    (5) Adult member's signature. The application must be signed by an 
adult member of the household.
    (j) Attesting to information on the application. The application 
must also include a statement, immediately above the space for 
signature, that the person signing the application certifies that all 
information furnished in the application is true and correct, that the 
application is being made in connection with the receipt of Federal 
funds, that the applicant is not already receiving Summer EBT benefits 
in another State or ITO, that Summer EBT agencies may verify the 
information on the application, and that deliberate misrepresentation 
of the information may subject the applicant to prosecution under 
applicable State and Federal criminal statutes.
    (k) Race and ethnicity. The application must contain space for 
collection of information on race and ethnicity of applicants. The 
questions should be labeled as optional, and incomplete responses 
cannot be used as the basis for the denial of benefits.
    (l) Accompanying instructions. The application must contain clear 
instructions is with respect to the completion and submission of the 
application to the Summer EBT agency to make eligibility 
determinations. The instructions should inform households that if they 
intend to move, or have recently moved, that they should apply for 
benefits in the State where their child will complete or completed the 
school year immediately preceding the summer operational period.
    (m) Required statements for the application. The application and 
descriptive materials must include substantially the following 
statements:
    (1) ``The Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act requires 
that we use information from this application to determine who 
qualifies for Summer EBT benefits. We can only approve complete forms. 
We may share your eligibility information with education, health, and 
nutrition programs to help them deliver program benefits to your 
household. Inspectors and law enforcement may also use your information 
to make sure that program rules are met. Some children qualify for 
Summer EBT without an application. Please contact your State or ITO to 
get Summer EBT for a foster child, and children who are homeless, 
migrant, or runaway.''

[[Page 90370]]

    (2) When either the Summer EBT agency or the LEA plans to use or 
disclose children's eligibility information for non-program purposes, 
additional information, as specified in Sec.  245.6(h) of this chapter, 
must be added to this statement. State agencies and LEAs are 
responsible for drafting the appropriate statement.
    (3) The application must contain the USDA nondiscrimination 
statement for Child Nutrition Programs.
    (4) The Summer EBT agency must inform applicants and prospective 
applicants that a non-household member may be designated as the 
authorized representative for application processing purposes if they 
have difficulty completing the application process.
    (n) Calculating income. The Summer EBT agency must use the income 
information provided by the household on the application to calculate 
the household's total current income. When a household submits a 
complete application, and the household's total current income is at or 
below the eligibility limits specified in the Income Eligibility 
Guidelines, the children in that household must be approved for Summer 
EBT benefits.
    (o) Persons authorized to receive eligibility information. Only 
persons directly connected with the administration or enforcement of a 
program or activity listed in this section may have access to 
children's eligibility information, without parent or guardian consent. 
Persons considered directly connected with administration or 
enforcement of a program or activity are Federal, State, ITO, or local 
program operators responsible for the ongoing operation of the program 
or activity or responsible for program compliance. Program operators 
may include persons responsible for carrying out program requirements 
and monitoring, reviewing, auditing, or investigating the program. 
Program operators may include contractors, to the extent those persons 
have a need to know the information for program administration or 
enforcement. Contractors may include evaluators, auditors, and others 
with whom Federal or State agencies, ITOs, and program operators 
contract with to assist in the administration or enforcement of their 
program in their behalf.
    (p) Disclosure of all eligibility information in addition to 
eligibility status. In addition to children's names and eligibility 
status, the Summer EBT agency, as appropriate, may disclose, without 
parental consent, all eligibility information obtained through the 
Summer EBT eligibility process (including all information on the 
application or obtained through streamlined certification) to:
    (1) Persons directly connected with the administration or 
enforcement of programs authorized under the Richard B. Russell 
National School Lunch Act, the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, or the Food 
and Nutrition Act of 2008. This means that all eligibility information 
obtained for the Summer EBT Program may be disclosed to persons 
directly connected with administering or enforcing regulations under 
the Summer EBT Program, National School Lunch or School Breakfast 
Programs (7 CFR parts 210 and 220, respectively), Child and Adult Care 
Food Program (7 CFR part 226), Summer Food Service Program (7 CFR part 
225), the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and 
Children (WIC) (7 CFR part 246), and the Supplemental Nutrition 
Assistance Program (SNAP) (7 CFR parts 271 through 285);
    (2) Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials for the 
purpose of investigating any alleged violation of the programs listed 
in Sec.  292.16(b)(1)(iii); and
    (3) The Comptroller General of the United States for purposes of 
audit and examination.
    (q) Phase-in flexibility. For 2024, alternative income applications 
that do not meet the criteria in paragraph (i) of this section can be 
used to confer eligibility for Summer EBT if the information provided 
on the alternative application is sufficient for the Summer EBT agency 
or LEA to determine that the household meets the income eligibility 
guidelines for Summer EBT. In 2024, Summer EBT agencies may delegate 
application processing to LEAs. If a Summer EBT agency delegates 
application processing to LEAs, then it must cover all administrative 
costs incurred by the LEAs with respect to Summer EBT application 
processing.


Sec.  292.14  Verification requirements.

    (a) Summer EBT applications are subject to the following 
verification requirements:
    (1) Verification for cause. (i) The Summer EBT agency must verify 
for cause applications, on a case-by-case basis, such as in an instance 
when the agency is aware of conflicting or inconsistent information 
from what was provided on the application.
    (ii) The Summer EBT agency may verify an application for cause at 
any time during the instructional year or summer operational period, 
but verification must be completed within 30 days of receipt of the 
application.
    (iii) Applications verified for cause are not considered part of 
three (3) percent sample size described in paragraph (a)(2) of this 
section.
    (iv) Applications do not need to be selected for verification for 
cause during initial application processing. A Summer EBT agency may 
become aware of a questionable application after the initial 
certification was completed and benefits were issued. In this case, the 
Summer EBT agency must verify the application for cause at the time 
they learn of the questionable or conflicting information.
    (v) All verification procedures in this section must be followed 
for applications selected for verification for cause in the same manner 
as an application randomly selected as part of the sample described in 
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
    (2) Verification sample. (i) The Summer EBT agency must verify 
eligibility of children in a sample of household Summer EBT 
applications approved for benefits for the summer.
    (ii) The sample size for the Summer EBT agency must equal three (3) 
percent of all applications approved by the Summer EBT agency from the 
start of the instructional year through April 1 of the school year 
immediately preceding the summer operational period, selected randomly 
from all applications.
    (3) Verification alternatives. (i) In lieu of carrying out 
provisions in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, Summer EBT agencies may 
propose alternative methods for verification that strengthen program 
integrity and preserve participant access.
    (ii) Summer EBT agencies that intend to propose alternative 
procedures must include a detailed description of their plan in their 
POM submission. Proposals are subject to USDA approval.
    (b) Replacing applications. The Summer EBT agency may, on a case-
by-case basis, replace up to ten percent of applications that are 
randomly selected as part of the verification sample. Applications may 
be replaced if the Summer EBT agency determines that the household 
would be unable to satisfactorily respond to the verification request.
    (c) Rolling verification sample selection. Summer EBT agencies may 
choose to conduct verification on a rolling basis, as long as the 
sample size requirements in paragraph (a)(3) of this section are met. 
(1) If conducting rolling verification, the Summer EBT agency must:
    (i)(A) Include in each sample pool only applications approved since 
the last sample was selected; and

[[Page 90371]]

    (B) Select three (3) percent of approved applications, as required 
by the sampling method, each time, but round down to the nearest whole 
number to prevent over-sampling. If rounding down results in a zero, no 
applications should be verified for the sample period, and the 
applications received in that sample period should be included in the 
next sample pool.
    (ii) Select the final sample on April 1.
    (A) Selecting only from the applications approved since the last 
sampling;
    (B) Summing the number of applications selected for verification to 
date (including the final, April 1 sample); and
    (C) Calculating three (3) percent of all applications approved as 
of April 1, and rounding up to the next whole number.
    (2) If the number of applications summed per paragraph 
(c)(1)(ii)(B) of this section is less than the three (3) percent 
calculated per paragraph (c)(1)(ii)(C) of this section, the Summer EBT 
agency must fill the remainder of the sample by selecting randomly from 
all applications.
    (3) Summer EBT agencies may choose to sample at any frequency prior 
to April 1, but may not sample any applications after April 1.
    (d) Verification after April 1. Applications that come in after 
April 1 are still subject to verification for cause, on a case-by-case 
basis, per paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
    (e) Direct verification. Summer EBT agencies must conduct direct 
verification activities with the programs eligible for use in 
streamlined certification, as defined in Sec.  292.12(d), as well as 
records from other assistance programs and administrative data, where 
available. Data records are subject to the timeframe specified in 
paragraph (e)(2) of this section.
    (1) Direct verification must be conducted prior to contacting the 
household for documentation.
    (2) For the purposes of direct verification, documentation may 
indicate participation in an applicable program or income at any point 
during the period of eligibility. The information provided only needs 
to indicate eligibility at a single point in time during the period of 
eligibility, not that the child was eligible at the time of application 
or verification.
    (3) Summer EBT agencies must include in their POM submission all 
sources of administrative data that is intended to be used for direct 
verification.
    (f) Verification procedures and assistance for households--(1) 
Exceptions from verification. Verification is not required of 
households if all children in the household are determined eligible 
based on documentation provided by the State or local agency 
responsible for the administration of the SNAP, FDPIR, TANF, or another 
means tested program, as approved by the Secretary, or if all children 
in the household are determined to be foster, homeless, migrant, or 
runaway, as defined in Sec.  245.2 of this chapter.
    (2) Notification of selection. Households selected for verification 
must be notified in writing that their applications were selected for 
verification. The written statement must include a telephone number to 
contact for assistance. Any communications with households concerning 
verification must be in an understandable and uniform format and, to 
the maximum extent practicable, in a language that parents and 
guardians can understand. These households must be advised of the type 
of information or documents that will be expected. Households selected 
for verification must be informed that:
    (i) They are required to submit the requested information to verify 
eligibility for Summer EBT benefits, by the date determined by the 
Summer EBT agency.
    (ii) They may, instead, submit proof that the children receive 
assistance under SNAP, FDPIR, TANF, or another means tested program, as 
approved by the Secretary.
    (iii) They may, instead, request that the Summer EBT agency contact 
the appropriate officials to confirm that their children are foster, 
homeless, migrant, or runaway.
    (iv) Failure to cooperate with verification efforts will result in 
the termination of benefits.
    (3) Sources of information. For the purposes of this section, 
sources of information for verification may include, but are not 
limited to, written evidence, individuals outside of the child's 
household who can verify the child's circumstances, and systems of 
records as follows:
    (i) Written evidence must be used as the primary source of 
information for verification. Written evidence includes written 
confirmation of a household's circumstances, such as wage stubs, award 
letters, and letters from employers. Whenever written evidence is 
insufficient to confirm income information on the application or 
current eligibility, the verifying agency may require confirmation from 
a person outside of the child's household, or accept a statement from 
an adult member of the child's household.
    (ii) Verbal confirmations of a household's circumstances by a 
person outside of the household may be made in person or by phone. The 
verifying official may select a person to contact if the household 
fails to designate one or designates one which is unacceptable to the 
verifying official. If the verifying official designates a person, 
contact must not be made without providing written or oral notice to 
the household. At the time of this notice, the household must be 
informed that it may consent to the contact or provide acceptable 
documentation in another form. If the household refuses to choose one 
of these options, its eligibility must be terminated in accordance with 
the normal procedures for failure to cooperate with verification 
efforts. Individuals outside of the child's household who can verify 
the child's circumstances could include but are not limited to: 
employers, social service agencies, school officials, and migrant 
agencies.
    (iii) Agency records to which the verifying agency may have access 
are not considered to be the same as a person outside of the child's 
household who can verify their circumstances. Information concerning 
income, household size, or SNAP, FDPIR, or TANF eligibility, maintained 
by other government agencies to which the verifying agency can legally 
gain access, must be used to confirm a household's income, size, or 
receipt of benefits, as applicable. Information may also be obtained 
from individuals or agencies serving categorically eligible children, 
as defined in Sec.  292.2, including foster, homeless, migrant, or 
runaway children.
    (iv) Households which dispute the validity of income information 
acquired through an individual outside of the child's household or a 
system of records must be given the opportunity to provide other 
documentation.
    (4) Documentation timeframe. Households selected and notified of 
their selection for verification must provide documentation of income. 
The documentation must indicate the source, amount and frequency of all 
household income and may indicate eligibility at any point during the 
period of eligibility. The information provided only needs to indicate 
eligibility for participation in the program at a single point in time 
during the period of eligibility, not that the child was certified for 
that program's benefits at the time of application or verification.
    (5) Household cooperation. If a household refuses to cooperate with 
efforts to verify, eligibility for Summer EBT benefits must be 
terminated.

[[Page 90372]]

    (6) Telephone assistance. The Summer EBT agency must provide a 
telephone number to households selected for verification to call free 
of charge to obtain information about the verification process. The 
telephone number must be prominently displayed on the letter to 
households selected for verification.
    (7) Follow-up attempts. The Summer EBT agency must make at least 
two attempts, at least one week apart, to contact any household that 
does not respond to a verification request. The attempt may be through 
a telephone call, email, or mail, and must be documented. Non-response 
to the initial request for verification includes no response and 
incomplete or ambiguous responses that do not permit the Summer EBT 
agency to resolve the children's eligibility for Summer EBT benefits.
    (8) Eligibility changes. The Summer EBT agency must complete the 
following activities if there is an eligibility change as a result of 
verification:
    (i) Make appropriate modifications to the initial eligibility 
determinations.
    (ii) Notify the household of any change in eligibility as a result 
of verification.
    (iii)(A) The notice must advise the household of:
    (1) The change;
    (2) The reasons for the change;
    (3) Notification of the right to appeal and when the appeal must be 
filed;
    (4) Instructions on how to appeal; and
    (5) The right to reapply at any time during the instructional year 
or summer operational period.
    (B) Properly document and retain on file at the Summer EBT agency 
the reasons for ineligibility.
    (9) Issuance of benefits. Benefits cannot be issued for 
applications selected for verification until the verification process 
is completed with the exception of verification for cause, as described 
in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
    (10) Timing of verification for continuous school calendars. In the 
case of children who are enrolled in a school operating on a continuous 
school calendar, the Summer EBT agency must receive approval from USDA 
for any alternative plans for the timing of conducting verification, in 
accordance with the State or ITO's approved POM.
    (11) Verification after benefit issuance. If a Summer EBT agency is 
alerted to a questionable application after initial approval or 
issuance of benefits, no further benefits should be issued until 
verification for cause, as outlined in paragraph (a)(1) of this section 
is complete and eligibility is confirmed.
    (12) Nondiscrimination. The verification efforts must be applied 
without regard to race, sex, color, national origin, age, or 
disability.
    (g) Verification of alternative income applications in 2024. In 
2024, Summer EBT agencies or LEAs should, on a case-by-case basis, 
verify for cause any questionable Summer EBT application or alternate 
income applications used to confer Summer EBT eligibility and follow 
the procedures in paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section.

Subpart D--Issuance and Use of Program Benefits


Sec.  292.15  General standards.

    (a) Timing. Summer EBT benefits are intended for use during the 
summer operational period, in accordance with the Summer EBT agency's 
approved POM.
    (b) Continuous school calendar. In the case of children who attend 
a school operating on a continuous school calendar, the Summer EBT 
agency must receive approval from USDA for any alternative plans for 
the periods during which Summer EBT benefits must be issued and used, 
in accordance with the State or ITO's approved POM.
    (c) Benefit issuance-(1) Providing benefits to participants. (i) 
The Summer EBT agency shall ensure the timely and accurate issuance of 
benefits.
    (A) For children who can be streamline certified or who have an 
approved Summer EBT application on file, benefits must be issued and 
available for participants to use at least seven calendar days and not 
more than 14 calendar days before the start of the summer operational 
period. When the Summer EBT agency does not have sufficient data to 
issue a benefit to an eligible child, the agency must work to resolve 
the case and issue the benefit as expeditiously as possible.
    (B) For eligible children who apply after the summer operational 
period begins, benefits must be issued and available to spend not later 
than 15 operational days after a complete application is received by 
the Summer EBT agency, so that participants may use their benefits 
during the summer.
    (ii) If the Summer EBT agency issues benefits after the summer 
operational period, the Summer EBT agency must submit to FNS a 
corrective action plan outlining the reasons benefits were not issued 
in a timely manner, and steps the Summer EBT agency will take to ensure 
timely issuance in the future.
    (iii) The Summer EBT agency's issuance schedule does not need to 
align with the start of calendar months and may include staggered 
benefit issuance across multiple days. Regardless of the issuance 
schedule, Summer EBT agencies may only issue a full three months of 
benefits for the summer operational period.
    (iv) Children on applications that are selected for verification 
must not be issued benefits until verification is complete and 
eligibility is confirmed. Additional information about the verification 
requirements for Summer EBT applications can be found at Sec.  292.14.
    (v) Summer EBT agencies must aid households with eligible children 
who do not reside in a permanent dwelling or have a fixed mailing 
address in obtaining Summer EBT benefits by assisting them in finding 
authorized representatives who can act on their behalf, or by using 
other appropriate means.
    (2) Method of issuance. Benefits may be issued:
    (i) In the form of an EBT card;
    (A) Into an existing EBT account associated with an existing EBT 
card; or
    (B) Into a new EBT account associated with a new EBT card;
    (ii) Through other electronic methods, as determined by the 
Secretary; or
    (iii) In the case of a Summer EBT agency that does not issue 
nutrition assistance program benefits electronically, using the same 
methods by which that Summer EBT agency issues benefits under the 
nutrition assistance program of that State.
    (d) Dual participation. (1) Dual participation in Summer EBT in the 
same summer operational period is not allowed.
    (2) Summer EBT agencies must develop procedures to detect and 
prevent dual participation across multiple States and/or ITOs, and must 
describe these procedures in their POMs, as explained in Sec.  
292.8(e)(9).
    (e) Benefit amount. (1) In 2024, the benefit will be $40 per month 
in the summer operational period for each eligible child, and will be 
adjusted in subsequent years to reflect changes in the cost of food as 
measured by the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP). Any year-to-year decrease of 
the TFP will not be implemented.
    (2) In Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, the 
Virgin Islands of the United States, and the Commonwealth of the 
Northern Mariana Islands, the Secretary may establish appropriate 
adjustments for each such State to the national average payment rates 
to reflect the differences between the costs of foods in those

[[Page 90373]]

States and the costs of foods in all other States.
    (3) Benefit amounts will be issued in an amount equal to the 
unrounded benefit amount from the prior year, adjusted to the nearest 
lower dollar increment to reflect changes to the cost of the diet 
described in section 3(u) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 
U.S.C. 2012(u)) for the 12-month period ending on November 30 of the 
preceding calendar year and rounded to the nearest lower dollar 
increment. Rates will be effective January 1 through December 31 of 
each year.
    (4) Summer EBT agencies may not prorate benefits for partial months 
and must issue the full three months of summer benefits to each 
eligible child.
    (f) Benefit allotments. (1) The Summer EBT agency may issue benefit 
allotments to a child in a single issuance prior to the start of the 
summer operational period, or multiple issuances provided that the 
first issuance occurs before the start of the summer operational 
period.
    (2) In providing benefit allotments Summer EBT agencies:
    (i) May stagger issuance throughout the month.
    (ii) Must establish an availability date for household access to 
their benefits and inform households of this date.
    (iii) Must issue the full benefit amount for all summer months to 
each eligible child who applies before the last day of the summer 
period, independent of the date of application submission or 
eligibility determination.
    (iv) Must adhere to the reporting requirements specified by USDA, 
regardless of the issuance schedule used.
    (g) Participant support--(1) Household training. The Summer EBT 
agency must provide written training materials to each eligible 
household prior to Summer EBT benefit issuance and as needed during 
ongoing operation of the Summer EBT Program. At a minimum, the 
household training must include:
    (i) Content which will familiarize each eligible household with:
    (A) Where benefits can be used;
    (B) What benefits can be used to purchase; and
    (C) Unallowable uses of benefits, and penalties for misuse;
    (ii) The appropriate utilization and security of the personal 
identification number (PIN);
    (iii) The established procedures to provide customer service during 
non-business hours that enable participants or proxies to report a 
lost, stolen, or damaged card, report other card or benefit issues, 
receive information on the EBT food balance, and receive the current 
benefit end date;
    (iv) Eligibility criteria for the Program;
    (v) Written materials and other information, including the specific 
rights to benefits. This must include the USDA statement of non-
discrimination. Written materials must be prepared at an educational 
reading level suitable for participant households; and
    (vi) Disclosure information regarding adjustments and a household's 
rights to notice, fair hearings, and provisional credits. The 
disclosure must also state where to call to dispute an adjustment and 
request a fair hearing.
    (2) EBT cards and PINs. Summer EBT agencies which issue EBT cards 
by mail must, at a minimum, use first class mail and sturdy non-
forwarding envelopes or packages to send Summer EBT cards to 
households.
    (i) The Summer EBT agency must permit a Summer EBT eligible 
household to select their PIN.
    (ii) PIN assignment procedures must be permitted in accordance with 
industry standards as long as PIN selection is available to households 
if they so desire and households are informed of this option.
    (iii) If assigning a PIN by mail in conjunction with card issuance, 
Summer EBT agencies must mail the PIN separate from the card one 
business day after the card is mailed.
    (3) Adjustments. The Summer EBT agency:
    (i) May make adjustments to benefits posted to household accounts 
after the posting process is complete but prior to the availability 
date for household access in the event benefits are erroneously posted.
    (ii) Must make adjustments to an account to correct an auditable, 
out-of-balance settlement condition that occurs during the redemption 
process as a result of a system error.
    (4) Providing replacement EBT cards or PINs. The Summer EBT agency 
must make replacement EBT cards available for pick up or place the card 
in the mail within two business days following notice by the household 
to the Summer EBT agency that the card has been lost, stolen or 
damaged.
    (i) The Summer EBT agency must ensure a duplicate account is not 
established which would permit households to access more than one 
account in the system.
    (ii) An immediate hold must be placed on accounts at the time 
notice is received from a household regarding the need for card or PIN 
replacement. The Summer EBT agency must implement a reporting system 
which is continually operative. Once a household reports their EBT card 
has been lost or stolen, the agency must assume liability for benefits 
subsequently drawn from the account and replace any lost or stolen 
benefits to the household. The Summer EBT agency must maintain a record 
showing the date and time of all reports by households that their card 
is lost or stolen.
    (5) Providing replacement EBT benefits. The Summer EBT agency must 
make replacement EBT benefits available to a household when the 
household reports that food purchased with Summer EBT benefits was 
destroyed in a household misfortune or disaster.
    (h) Expungement--(1) General expungement procedures--(i) Summer EBT 
agencies shall expunge Summer EBT benefits 122 calendar days after 
their issuance.
    (ii) No less than 30 days before benefit expungement is scheduled 
to begin, Summer EBT agencies must provide notice to the household of 
the expungement date and amount that is scheduled for expungement.
    (iii) Expunged benefits shall not be reinstated.
    (2) Procedures to adjust Summer EBT accounts. The Summer EBT agency 
shall establish procedures to adjust Summer EBT benefits that have 
already been posted to an EBT account prior to the household accessing 
the account, or to remove benefits from inactive accounts for 
expungement.
    (i) Whenever benefits are expunged, the Summer EBT agency must 
document the date and amount of the benefits in the household case 
file.
    (ii) Issuance reports must reflect the adjustment to the Summer EBT 
agency issuance totals to comply with reporting requirements in Sec.  
292.23.
    (i) Expungement Procedures specific to States that administer the 
supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP). (1) Summer EBT 
agencies that load Summer EBT benefits onto existing SNAP accounts must 
draw down Summer benefits prior to drawing from the household's SNAP 
benefits.
    (2) Expunged benefits must be returned to the State's Summer EBT 
account and must not be co-mingled with SNAP funds.


Sec.  292.16  Issuance and adjustment requirements specific to States 
that administer SNAP.

    (a) Basic issuance requirements. State Summer EBT agencies must 
establish issuance and accountability systems which ensure that only 
certified eligible households receive benefits; that Program benefits 
are timely distributed in the correct amounts; and that benefit

[[Page 90374]]

issuance and reconciliation activities are properly conducted and 
accurately reported to FNS.
    (1) On-line issuance of electronic benefits. State Summer EBT 
agencies may issue benefits to households through an on-line EBT system 
in which Program benefits are stored in a central computer database and 
electronically accessed by households at the point of sale via reusable 
plastic cards.
    (2) Alternative benefit issuance system. (i) If the Secretary, in 
consultation with the Office of the Inspector General, determines that 
Program integrity would be improved by changing the issuance system of 
a State, the Secretary shall require the State Summer EBT agency to 
issue or deliver benefits using another method.
    (ii) The cost of documents or systems which may be required as a 
result of a permanent alternative issuance system must not be imposed 
upon retail food firms participating in the Program.
    (3) Contracting or delegating issuance responsibilities. State 
Summer EBT agencies may assign to others such as banks, savings and 
loan associations, and other commercial businesses, the responsibility 
for the issuance of benefits. State Summer EBT agencies may permit 
contractors to subcontract assigned issuance responsibilities.
    (i) Any assignment of issuance functions must clearly delineate the 
responsibilities of both parties. The State Summer EBT agency remains 
responsible, regardless of any agreements to the contrary, for ensuring 
that assigned duties are carried out in accordance with these 
regulations. In addition, the State Summer EBT agency is strictly 
liable to FNS for all losses of benefits, even if those losses are the 
result of the performance of issuance, security, or accountability 
duties by another party.
    (ii) All issuance contracts must follow procurement standards set 
forth in Sec.  292.27.
    (iii) The State Summer EBT agency must not assign the issuance of 
benefits to any retail food firm.
    (4) EBT system administration. (i) The State Summer EBT agency must 
be responsible for the coordination and management of the EBT system. 
The Secretary may suspend or terminate some or all EBT system funding 
or withdraw approval of the EBT system from the State Summer EBT agency 
upon a finding that the State Summer EBT agency or its contracted 
representative has failed to comply with the requirements of this part.
    (ii) The State Summer EBT agency must indicate how it plans to 
incorporate additional programs into the EBT system if it anticipates 
the addition of other public assistance programs concurrent with or 
after implementation of the EBT system. The State Summer EBT agency 
must also consult with the State agency officials responsible for 
administering the WIC prior to submitting the Planning APD for FNS 
approval.
    (5) Master issuance file. (i) The State Summer EBT agency must 
establish a master issuance file which is a composite of the issuance 
records of all eligible children. The master issuance file must contain 
all the information needed to identify eligible children, issue Summer 
EBT benefits, record the participation activity for each household, and 
supply all information necessary to fulfill the reporting requirements 
in Sec.  292.23.
    (ii) The master issuance file must be kept current and accurate. It 
must be updated and maintained through the use of documents such as 
notices of change and controls for expired certification periods.
    (iii) Before entering an eligible child's data on the master 
issuance file, the State Summer EBT agency must review the master 
issuance file to ensure that the child is not currently participating 
in, or disqualified from, the Program.
    (6) Shared responsibility of issuance activities. State Summer EBT 
agencies may divide issuance responsibilities between at least two 
persons to prevent any single individual from having complete control 
over the authorization of issuances and the issuances themselves. 
Responsibilities to be divided include maintenance of inventory 
records, the posting of benefits to an EBT account, and preparation of 
EBT cards and PINs for mailing. If issuance functions in an office are 
handled by one person, a second-party review must be made to verify 
card inventory, the reconciliation of the mail log, and the number of 
mailings prepared.
    (7) Summer EBT monitoring, examinations, and audits. State Summer 
EBT agency's accountability system monitoring procedures must be 
included in the monitoring procedures for SNAP as described at Sec.  
274.1(i) of this chapter.
    (8) Compliance investigations. State Summer EBT agencies must 
provide on-line read-only access to State EBT systems for compliance 
investigations.
    (i) The State Summer EBT agency is required to provide software and 
telecommunications capability as necessary to FNS Retailer 
Investigation Branch Area offices, Regional offices, and Field offices 
so that FNS compliance investigators, other appropriate FNS personnel, 
and USDA OIG investigators have access to the system in order to 
conduct investigations of program abuse and alleged violations; and
    (ii) The State Summer EBT agency must ensure that FNS compliance 
investigators and USDA OIG investigators have access to EBT cards and 
accounts that are updated as necessary to conduct SNAP investigations.
    (9) Federal financial participation. Access to system 
documentation, including cost records of contractors or subcontractors 
shall be made available and incorporated into contractual agreements.
    (b) Disclosure. (1) Use or disclosure of information obtained from 
Summer EBT recipients must be restricted to:
    (i) Persons directly connected with the administration or 
enforcement of the provisions of section 13A of the Richard B. Russell 
National School Lunch Act, the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, or 
regulations in this chapter, other Federal assistance programs, or 
federally-assisted State programs providing assistance on a means-
tested basis to low income individuals;
    (ii) Employees of the Comptroller General's Office of the United 
States for audit examination authorized by any other provision of law; 
and
    (iii) Local, State, or Federal law enforcement officials, upon 
their written request, for the purpose of investigating an alleged 
violation of the NSLA, Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, or regulations 
in this chapter. The written request shall include the identity of the 
individual requesting the information and their authority to do so, 
violation being investigated, and the identity of the person on whom 
the information is requested.
    (2) Local educational agencies administering the National School 
Lunch Program established under the Richard B. Russell National School 
Lunch Act or the School Breakfast Program established under the Child 
Nutrition Act of 1966, for the purpose of directly certifying the 
eligibility of school-aged children for receipt of free and reduced 
price meals under the School Lunch and School Breakfast programs.
    (3) Recipients of information released under this section must 
adequately protect the information against unauthorized disclosure to 
persons or for purposes not specified in this section.
    (4) If there is a written request by a responsible member of the 
household, its currently authorized representative, or a person acting 
on its behalf to review

[[Page 90375]]

material and information contained in its casefile, the material and 
information contained in the casefile shall be made available for 
inspection during normal business hours. However, the Summer EBT agency 
may withhold confidential information, such as the names of individuals 
who have disclosed information about the household without the 
household's knowledge, or the nature or status of pending criminal 
prosecutions.
    (5) Copies of regulations, plans of operation, State Summer EBT 
agency manuals, State Summer EBT agency corrective action plans, and 
Federal procedures may be obtained from FNS in accordance with 7 CFR 
part 295.
    (c) Program administration--(1) Automation of Summer EBT 
operations. All State Summer EBT agencies are required to sufficiently 
automate their Summer EBT operations and computerize their systems for 
obtaining, maintaining, utilizing, and transmitting information 
concerning Summer EBT.
    (2) Requirements. In order to safeguard certification and issuance 
records from unauthorized creation or tampering, the Summer EBT 
agencies must establish an organizational structure which divides the 
responsibility for eligibility determinations and benefit issuance 
among certification, data management, and issuance units within 
coordinating or partnering Summer EBT agencies.
    (3) Court suit reporting--(i) State Summer EBT agency 
responsibility. (A) In the event that a State Summer EBT agency is sued 
by any person(s) in a State or Federal Court in any matter which 
involves the State Summer EBT agency's administration of Summer EBT, 
the Summer EBT agency shall immediately notify FNS that suit has been 
brought and shall furnish FNS with copies of the original pleadings. 
Summer EBT agencies involved in suits shall, upon request of FNS, take 
such action as is necessary to join the United States and/or 
appropriate officials of the Federal Government, such as the Secretary 
of USDA or the Administrator of FNS, as parties to the suit. FNS may 
request to join the following types of suits:
    (1) Class action suits;
    (2) A suit in which an adverse decision could have a national 
impact;
    (3) A suit challenging Federal policy such as a provision of the 
NSLA, Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, or regulations in this part or an 
interpretation of the regulations in this part; or,
    (4) A suit based on an empirical situation that is likely to recur.
    (B) FNS may advise a Summer EBT agency to seek a settlement 
agreement of a court suit if the Summer EBT agency is being sued 
because it misapplied Federal policy in administering the Summer EBT 
Program.
    (C) State Summer EBT agencies shall notify FNS when court cases 
have been dismissed or otherwise settled. State Summer EBT agencies 
shall also provide FNS with information that is requested regarding the 
State Summer EBT agency's compliance with the requirements of court 
orders or settlement agreements.
    (4) Notification of lawsuits. FNS shall notify all Summer EBT 
agencies of any suits brought in Federal court that involve FNS' 
administration of the Program and which have the potential of affecting 
many Summer EBT agencies' Program operations. Summer EBT agencies may 
not be notified of suits brought in Federal Court involving FNS' 
administration of the Program which may only affect Program operations 
in one or two States or ITOs. The notification provided to Summer EBT 
agencies shall contain a description of the Federal policy that is 
affected.
    (d) Procedures for program administration in Alaska--(1) Purpose. 
To achieve the efficient and effective administration of Summer EBT in 
rural areas of Alaska, FNS has determined that it is necessary to 
develop additional regulations which are specifically designed to 
accommodate the unique demographic and climatic characteristics which 
exist in these rural areas. The regulations established in this 
paragraph (d) apply only in those areas of Alaska designated as 
``rural'' in Sec.  272.7(b) of this chapter. All regulations in this 
part not specifically modified by this paragraph (d) shall remain in 
effect.
    (2) Fee agents. Fee agent means a paid agent who, on behalf of the 
State Summer EBT agency, is authorized to make applications available 
to low-income households, assist in the completion of applications, 
conduct required interviews, secure required verification, forward 
completed applications and supporting documentation to the State Summer 
EBT agency, and provide other services as required by the State Summer 
EBT agency. Such services shall not include making final decisions on 
household eligibility or benefit levels.
    (3) Application processing. The State Summer EBT agency may modify 
the application processing requirements in this part as necessary to 
insure prompt delivery of services to eligible households. The 
following restrictions apply:
    (4) Fee agent processing. If the signed application is first 
submitted by a household to a fee agent, the fee agent shall mail the 
application to the State Summer EBT agency within 5 days of receipt.
    (5) Application filing date. An application is considered filed for 
purposes of timely processing when it is received by an office of the 
State Summer EBT agency.
    (6) Expedited service. (i) If the signed application is first 
submitted by a household to a fee agent, the fee agent shall mail the 
application to the State Summer EBT agency within 5 days of receipt. If 
the household is eligible for expedited service, the State agency will 
mail the benefits no later than the close of business of the second 
working day following the date the application was received by the 
State Summer EBT agency.
    (ii) If the signed application is submitted directly to the State 
Summer EBT agency in person by a rural resident or its authorized 
representative or by mail, the State Summer EBT agency shall process 
the application and issue benefits to households eligible for expedited 
service in accordance with the time standards contained in this part.
    (iii) If an incomplete application is submitted directly to the 
State Summer EBT agency by mail, the State Summer EBT agency shall 
conduct the interview by the first working day following the date the 
application was received if the fee agent can contact the household or 
the household can be reached by telephone or radio-phone and does not 
object to this method of interviewing on grounds of privacy. Based on 
information obtained during the interview, the State Summer EBT agency 
shall complete the application and process the case. Because of the 
mailing time in rural areas, the State Summer EBT agency shall not 
return the completed application to the household for signature. The 
processing standard shall be calculated from the date the application 
was filed.
    (7) Social Security insurance (SSI) joint processing. Social 
Security Administration (SSA) workers shall mail all jointly processed 
applications to the appropriate Summer EBT agency office within 5 days 
of receipt of the application. A jointly processed application shall be 
considered filed for purposes of timely processing when it is received 
by an office of the State Summer EBT agency. The household, if 
determined eligible, shall receive benefits retroactive to the first 
day of the month in which the jointly processed

[[Page 90376]]

application was received by the SSA worker.
    (8) Fair hearings, fraud hearings, and agency conferences. The 
Summer EBT agency shall conduct fair hearings, administrative fraud 
hearings, and agency conferences with households that wish to contest 
denial of expedited service in the most efficient manner possible, 
either by face-to-face contact, telephone, radiophone, or other means 
of correspondence including written correspondence, in order to meet 
the respective time standards contained in this part.
    (e) Disqualification. (1) The Summer EBT agency shall be 
responsible to investigate cases of alleged intentional Program 
violation, and to ensure that appropriate cases are acted upon The 
State Summer EBT agency must ensure investigations are consistent with 
Sec.  273.16(a) of this chapter.
    (2) The penalties for intentional Summer EBT Program violations 
specified at Sec.  273.16(b) of this chapter as well as the definition 
of intentional program violations at Sec.  273.16(c) of this chapter 
are applicable to individuals 18 years of age or over who:
    (i) Allegedly committed an intentional Summer EBT Program 
violation; or
    (ii) Allegedly ordered, coerced, persuaded, encouraged, or 
otherwise induced a person under the age of 18 to commit an intentional 
Summer EBT Program violation.
    (3) Requirements for notifying households about disqualification 
penalties that are specified at Sec.  273.16(d) of this chapter apply 
to Summer EBT.
    (4) Disqualification hearing procedures for individuals accused of 
intentional Program violation specified at Sec.  273.16(e)(f) through 
(h) of this chapter also apply to Summer EBT.
    (5) Each State Summer EBT agency must report to FNS information 
concerning individuals disqualified for an intentional Program 
violation in accordance with Sec.  273.16(i) of this chapter for Summer 
EBT.
    (6) In cases where the determination of intentional program 
violation is reversed by a court of appropriate jurisdiction, the State 
agency must reinstate the individual in the program if the household is 
eligible.
    (f) Restoration of lost benefits--(1) Entitlement. (i) The Summer 
EBT agency must restore benefits which were lost whenever the loss was 
caused by an error by the Summer EBT agency or by an administrative 
disqualification for intentional Program violation which was 
subsequently reversed, or if there is a statement elsewhere in the 
regulations specifically stating that the household is entitled to 
restoration of lost benefits. Furthermore, unless there is a statement 
elsewhere in this part that a household is entitled to lost benefits 
for a longer period, benefits shall be restored for not more than 
twelve months prior to whichever of the following occurred first:
    (A) The date the Summer EBT agency receives a request for 
restoration from a household; or
    (B) The date the Summer EBT agency is notified or otherwise 
discovers that a loss to a household has occurred.
    (ii) The Summer EBT agency must restore benefits which were found 
by any judicial action to have been wrongfully withheld. If the 
judicial action is the first action the recipient has taken to obtain 
restoration of lost benefits, then benefits must be restored for a 
period of not more than twelve months from the date the court action 
was initiated. When the judicial action is a review of a Summer EBT 
agency action, the benefits must be restored for a period of not more 
than twelve months from the first of the following dates:
    (A) The date the Summer EBT agency receives a request for 
restoration.
    (B) If no request for restoration is received, the date the fair 
hearing action was initiated; but
    (C) Never more than one year from when the Summer EBT agency is 
notified of, or discovers, the loss.
    (D) Benefits must be restored even if the child is currently 
ineligible.
    (2) Errors discovered by the Summer EBT agency. If the Summer EBT 
agency determines that a loss of benefits has occurred, and the 
household is entitled to restoration of those benefits, the Summer EBT 
agency must automatically take action to restore any benefits that were 
lost. No action by the household is necessary. However, benefits must 
not be restored if the benefits were lost more than 12 months prior to 
the month the loss was discovered by the State agency in the normal 
course of business, or were lost more than 12 months prior to the month 
the State agency was notified in writing or orally of a possible loss 
to a specific household. The State agency shall notify the household of 
its entitlement, the amount of benefits to be restored, any offsetting 
that was done, the method of restoration, and the right to appeal 
through the fair hearing process if the household disagrees with any 
aspect of the proposed lost benefit restoration.
    (3) Disputed benefits. (i) If the Summer EBT agency determines that 
a household is entitled to restoration of lost benefits, but the 
household does not agree with the amount to be restored as calculated 
by the Summer EBT agency or any other action taken by the Summer EBT 
agency to restore lost benefits, the household may request a fair 
hearing within 90 days of the date the household is notified of its 
entitlement to restoration of lost benefits. If a fair hearing is 
requested prior to or during the time lost benefits are being restored, 
the household shall receive the lost benefits as determined by the 
Summer EBT agency pending the results of the fair hearing. If the fair 
hearing decision is favorable to the household, the Summer EBT agency 
must restore the lost benefits in accordance with that decision.
    (ii) If a household believes it is entitled to restoration of lost 
benefits but the Summer EBT agency, after reviewing the case file, does 
not agree, the household has 90 days from the date of the Summer EBT 
agency determination to request a fair hearing. The Summer EBT agency 
must restore lost benefits to the household only if the fair hearing 
decision is favorable to the household. Benefits lost more than 12 
months prior to the date the Summer EBT agency was initially informed 
of the household's possible entitlement to lost benefits shall not be 
restored.
    (4) Lost benefits to individuals disqualified for intentional 
Program violation. Individuals disqualified for intentional Program 
violation are entitled to restoration of any benefits lost during the 
months that they were disqualified, not to exceed twelve months prior 
to the date of Summer EBT agency notification, only if the decision 
which resulted in disqualification is subsequently reversed.
    (5) Method of restoration. Regardless of whether a household is 
currently eligible or ineligible, the Summer EBT agency must restore 
lost benefits to a household by issuing an allotment equal to the 
amount of benefits that were lost. The amount restored shall be issued 
in addition to the allotment currently eligible households are entitled 
to receive.
    (6) Accounting procedures. The Summer EBT agency shall be 
responsible for maintaining an accounting system for documenting a 
child's entitlement to restoration of lost benefits and for recording 
the balance of lost benefits that must be restored. The Summer EBT 
agency must at a minimum, document how the amount to be restored was 
calculated and the reason lost benefits must be restored. The 
accounting system must be designed to readily identify those situations 
where a claim against a household can be used to offset the amount to 
be restored.

[[Page 90377]]

    (g) Retailers. Retail food operations authorized to participate as 
a SNAP retailer must also accept State Summer EBT benefits.
    (h) Record retentions and forms of security. The State Summer EBT 
agency must maintain issuance, inventory, reconciliation, and other 
accountability records related to Summer EBT.
    (1) Availability of records. (i) The State Summer EBT agency shall 
maintain issuance, inventory, reconciliation, and other accountability 
records for a period of three years. This period may be extended at the 
written request of FNS.
    (ii) In lieu of the records themselves, easily retrievable 
microfilm, microfiche, or computer tapes which contain the required 
information may be maintained.
    (2) Control of issuance documents. The State Summer EBT agency 
shall control all issuance documents which establish household 
eligibility while the documents are transferred and processed within 
the State Summer EBT agency. The State Summer EBT agency shall use 
numbers, batching, inventory control logs, or similar controls from the 
point of initial receipt through the issuance and reconciliation 
process.
    (3) Accountable documents. (i) EBT cards shall be considered 
accountable documents. The State Summer EBT agency shall provide the 
following minimum security and control procedures for these documents:
    (A) Secure storage;
    (B) Access limited to authorized personnel;
    (C) Bulk inventory control records;
    (D) Subsequent control records maintained through the point of 
issuance or use; and
    (E) Periodic review and validation of inventory controls and 
records by parties not otherwise involved in maintaining control 
records.
    (ii) For notices of change which initiate, update or terminate the 
master issuance file, the State Summer EBT agency shall, at a minimum, 
provide secure storage and shall limit access to authorized personnel.
    (i) Benefit redemption by eligible households--(1) Eligible food. 
Program benefits may be used only by the household, or other persons 
the household selects, to purchase eligible food for the household from 
SNAP-authorized retailers, which includes, for certain households, the 
purchase of prepared meals, and for other households residing in 
certain designated areas of Alaska, the purchase of hunting and fishing 
equipment with benefits.
    (2) Prior payment prohibition. Program benefits must not be used to 
pay for any eligible food purchased prior to the time at which an EBT 
card is presented to authorized retailers or meal services. Benefits 
must not be used to pay for any eligible food in advance of the receipt 
of food, except when prior payment is for food purchased from a 
nonprofit cooperative food purchasing venture.
    (3) Transaction limits. No minimum dollar amount per transaction or 
maximum limit on the number of transactions can be established. In 
addition, no transaction fees can be imposed on Summer EBT households 
utilizing the EBT system to access their benefits.
    (4) Access to balances. (i) Households shall be permitted to 
determine their Summer EBT account balances without making a purchase 
or standing in a checkout line.
    (ii) The Summer EBT agency must ensure that the EBT system is 
capable of providing a transaction history for a period of up to 2 
calendar months to households upon request.
    (iii) Households must be provided printed receipts at the time of 
transaction. At a minimum this information must:
    (A) State the date, merchant's name and location, transaction type, 
transaction amount and remaining balance for the Summer EBT account;
    (B) Comply with the requirements of 12 CFR part 205 (Regulation E) 
in addition to the requirements of this section; and
    (C) Identify the Summer EBT households member's account number 
using a truncated number or coded transaction number. The child's name 
must not appear on the receipt except when a signature is required when 
utilizing a manual transaction voucher.
    (5) Equal treatment. The EBT system must be implemented and 
operated in a manner that maintains equal treatment for Summer EBT 
households. Summer EBT benefits must be accepted for eligible foods at 
the same prices and on the same terms and conditions applicable to cash 
purchases of the same foods at the same store. However, nothing in this 
part may be construed as authorizing FNS to specify the prices at which 
retail food stores may sell food. However, public or private nonprofit 
homeless meal providers may only request voluntary use of Summer EBT 
benefits from homeless Summer EBT recipients and may not request such 
household using Summer EBT benefits to pay more than the average cost 
of the food purchased by the public or private nonprofit homeless meal 
provider contained in a meal served to the patrons of the meal service. 
For purposes of this section, ``average cost'' is determined by 
averaging food costs over a period of up to one calendar month. 
Voluntary payments by Summer EBT recipients in excess of such costs may 
be accepted by the meal providers. The value of donated foods from any 
source must not be considered in determining the amount to be requested 
from Summer EBT recipients. All indirect costs, such as those incurred 
in the acquisition, storage, or preparation of the foods used in meals 
shall also be excluded. In addition, if others have the option of 
eating free or making a monetary donation, Summer EBT recipients must 
be provided the same option of eating free or making a donation in 
money or Summer EBT benefits. No retail food store may single out 
Summer EBT recipients for special treatment in any way. The following 
requirements for the equal treatment of Summer EBT households must 
directly apply to EBT systems:
    (i) Retailers must not establish special checkout lanes which are 
only for Summer EBT households. If special lanes are designated for the 
purpose of accepting other electronic debit or credit cards and/or 
other payment methods such as checks, Summer EBT customers with EBT 
cards may also be assigned to such lanes as long as other commercial 
customers are assigned there as well.
    (ii) Checkout lanes equipped with POS devices shall be made 
available to Summer EBT households during all retail store hours of 
operation.
    (6) Households eligible for prepared meals--(i) Meals-on-wheels. 
Eligible guardians of Summer EBT recipients 60 years of age or over or 
guardians who are housebound, physically handicapped, or otherwise 
disabled to the extent that they are unable to adequately prepare meals 
may use Summer EBT benefits to purchase meals for the participant that 
are prepared for and delivered to them by a nonprofit meal delivery 
service authorized by FNS.
    (ii) Communal dining facilities. Eligible guardians of Summer EBT 
recipients 60 years of age or over may use Summer EBT benefits issued 
to purchase meals for the participant that are prepared at communal 
dining facilities authorized by FNS for that purpose.
    (iii) Residents of certain institutions. (A) Eligible residents of 
a group living arrangement may use Summer EBT benefits issued to them 
to purchase meals prepared especially for them at a group living 
arrangement which is authorized by FNS to redeem Summer

[[Page 90378]]

EBT benefits in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section.
    (B) Residents of shelters for battered women and children may use 
their Program benefits to purchase meals prepared especially for the 
participant at a shelter which is authorized by FNS to redeem benefits 
in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section.
    (iv) Homeless households. (A) Homeless Summer EBT households may 
use their benefits to purchase prepared meals for the participant from 
authorized homeless meal providers.
    (B) Eligible homeless Summer EBT households may use their benefits 
to purchase meals for the participant from restaurants authorized by 
FNS for such purpose.
    (7) Allowable purchase of equipment for hunting and fishing. 
Eligible Summer EBT households residing in areas of Alaska determined 
by FNS as areas where access to authorized retailers is difficult and 
which rely substantially on hunting and fishing for subsistence may use 
all or any part of their benefits issued to purchase hunting and 
fishing equipment such as nets, hooks, rods, harpoons and knives, but 
may not use benefits to purchase firearms, ammunition, and other 
explosives.
    (8) Limiting hunting and fishing purchases to eligible households. 
State Summer EBT agencies shall implement a method to ensure that 
access to prepared meals and hunting and fishing equipment is limited 
to eligible households as described in paragraphs (i)(6) and (7) of 
this section.
    (9) Container deposit fees. Program benefits may not be used to pay 
for deposit fees in excess of the amount of the State fee reimbursement 
required to purchase any food or food product contained in a returnable 
bottle or can, regardless of whether the fee is included in the shelf 
price posted for item. The returnable container type and fee must be 
included in State law in order for the customer to be able to pay for 
the upfront deposit with Summer EBT benefits. If a Summer EBT eligible 
product has a State deposit fee associated with it, the product remains 
eligible for purchase with Summer EBT benefits, and the State deposit 
fee may be paid with Summer EBT benefits as well; however, any fee in 
excess of the State deposit fee must be paid in cash or other form of 
payment other than with Summer EBT benefits.
    (j) Reconciliation. State Summer EBT agencies must account for all 
issuance through a reconciliation process as described by USDA.


Sec.  292.17  Retailer integrity requirements specific to States that 
administer SNAP.

    (a) Participation of retail food stores and wholesale food 
concerns, and redemption of Summer EBT benefits. Requirements and 
restrictions on the participation of retail food stores and wholesale 
food concerns and the redemption of benefits described at Sec. Sec.  
278.2, 278.3 and 278.4 of this chapter, including the acceptance of 
benefits for eligible food at authorized firms, also apply to 
activities involving Summer EBT benefits.
    (b) Firm eligibility standards. A firm may be subject to the 
following actions described at Sec.  278.1 of this chapter for 
noncompliance or violations involving Summer EBT benefits:
    (1) The requirements described at Sec.  278.1(b)(4) of this chapter 
regarding a collateral bond or irrevocable letter of credit for 
applicant firms with certain sanctions apply to applicant firms with 
sanctions imposed for violations involving Summer EBT benefits. The 
amount of the collateral bond or irrevocable letter of credit shall be 
calculated in accordance with Sec.  278.1(b)(4)(i)(D) and shall also 
include the amount of Summer EBT benefit redemptions when calculating 
the average monthly benefit redemption volume.
    (2) Authorization shall be denied or withdrawn based on a 
determination by the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) that a firm lacks 
or fails to maintain necessary business integrity and reputation, in 
accordance with the standards and time periods described at Sec.  
278.1(b)(3), (k)(3), and (l)(1)(iv) of this chapter. When making such 
determinations, FNS shall consider the criteria referred to in Sec.  
278.1(b)(3), (k)(3), and (l)(1)(iv) where the underlying activities 
involve Summer EBT benefits.
    (3) Firm authorization shall be denied or withdrawn for failure to 
pay any claims, fines, or civil money penalties in the manner described 
at Sec.  278.1(k)(7) and (l)(1)(v) and (vi) of this chapter where such 
sanctions were imposed for violations involving Summer EBT benefits.
    (c) Penalties. For firms that commit certain violations described 
at Sec. Sec.  278.6 and 278.2 of this chapter where such violations 
involve Summer EBT benefits, FNS shall take the corresponding action 
prescribed at Sec.  278.6 or Sec.  278.2 for that violation. For the 
purposes of assigning a period of disqualification, a warning letter 
shall not be considered to be a sanction. Specifically, FNS shall:
    (1) Disqualify a firm permanently, as described at Sec.  
278.6(e)(1)(i) of this chapter, for trafficking, as defined at Sec.  
284.1(b)(1) of this chapter, or impose a civil money penalty in lieu of 
permanent disqualification, as described at Sec.  278.6(i) of this 
chapter, where such compliance policy and program is designed to 
prevent violations of the regulations in this section;
    (2) Disqualify a firm permanently, as described at Sec.  
278.6(e)(1)(ii) of this chapter, for any violation involving Summer EBT 
benefits committed by a firm that had already been sanctioned at least 
twice before under this section or 7 CFR part 278;
    (3) Disqualify the firm for 5 years, as described at Sec.  
278.6(e)(2)(v) of this chapter, or for 3 years, as described at Sec.  
278.6(e)(3)(iv) of this chapter, for unauthorized acceptance violations 
involving Summer EBT benefits, and impose fines, as described at Sec.  
278.6(m) of this chapter, for unauthorized acceptance violations 
involving Summer EBT benefits;
    (4) Disqualify the firm for 5 years in circumstances described at 
Sec.  278.6(e)(2) of this chapter when the amount of redemptions, which 
shall also include the amount of Summer EBT redemptions, exceed food 
sales for the same period of time, as described at Sec.  
278.6(e)(2)(ii) through (iv);
    (5) Disqualify the firm for 3 years as described at Sec.  
278.6(e)(3)(ii) of this chapter for situations described at Sec.  
278.6(e)(2) of this chapter involving Summer EBT benefits;
    (6) Disqualify the firm for 1 year for credit account violations as 
described at Sec. Sec.  278.6(e)(4)(ii) and 278.2(f) of this chapter, 
where such violations involve Summer EBT benefits;
    (7) Disqualify the firm for ineligibles violations for such 
circumstances and corresponding time periods as described at Sec.  
278.6(e)(2)(i), (e)(3)(i), (e)(4)(i), and (e)(5) of this chapter, where 
such violations involve Summer EBT benefits;
    (8) Double the appropriate period of disqualification for a 
violation, as described at Sec.  278.6(e)(6) of this chapter, where 
such violation involves Summer EBT benefits, when the firm has once 
before been assigned a sanction under this section or 7 CFR part 278;
    (9) Issue a warning letter to the violative firm when violations 
are too limited to warrant a period of disqualification, as described 
at Sec.  278.6(e)(7) of this chapter, where such violations involve 
Summer EBT benefits;
    (10) Impose a civil money penalty for hardship or transfer of 
ownership, as described at Sec.  278.6(g) of this chapter, in amounts 
calculated using the described formula at Sec.  278.6(g), which shall 
also

[[Page 90379]]

include the relevant amount of Summer EBT redemptions when calculating 
the average monthly benefit redemptions; and
    (11) Impose a civil money penalty in lieu of permanent 
disqualification for trafficking as described at Sec.  278.6(j) of this 
chapter in an amount calculated using the described formula at Sec.  
278.6(j), which shall also include the relevant amount of Summer EBT 
redemptions when calculating the average monthly benefit redemptions.
    (d) Claims. The standards for determination and disposition of 
claims against retail food stores and wholesale food concerns described 
at Sec.  278.7 of this chapter apply to Summer EBT benefits.
    (e) Administrative and Judicial review. Firms aggrieved by 
administrative action under 7 CFR parts 271, 278, and 279 may request 
administrative review of the administrative action with USDA in 
accordance with 7 CFR part 279, subpart A. Firms aggrieved by the 
determination of such an administrative review may seek judicial review 
of the determination under 5 U.S.C. 702 through 706.


Sec.  292.18  Requirements specific to States that administer Nutrition 
Assistance Program (NAP) programs.

    Summer EBT benefits issued by a Territory that administers the 
Nutrition Assistance Program in lieu of SNAP may only be used by the 
eligible household that receives such summer benefits to purchase 
eligible foods from retail food stores that have been approved for 
participation in the Nutrition Assistance Program in American Samoa, 
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the Northern 
Mariana Islands. States that administer NAP shall establish issuance 
and accountability systems which ensure that only certified eligible 
households receive Summer EBT benefits.


Sec.  292.19  Requirements specific to ITO Summer EBT agencies.

    (a) The ITO Summer EBT Agency must ensure that Summer EBT Program 
benefits are used by the eligible household that receives such benefits 
to transact for supplemental foods from retailers that have been 
approved for participation in the WIC Program. The ITO Summer EBT 
agency must:
    (1) Use the same benefit delivery model for all participants 
throughout its service area, in accordance with its FNS-approved POM:
    (i) For ITOs using a CVB-only benefit delivery model, issue a 
benefit level equal to the amount set forth in Sec.  292.15(e); and
    (ii) For ITOs using a food package benefit delivery model, a 
combination CVB and food package benefit delivery model, or an 
alternate benefit delivery model, issue a benefit not to exceed the 
amounts set forth in Sec.  292.15(e);
    (2) Ensure vendors charge prices for eligible food items which are 
reasonable for the area(s) served and are at the current price or less 
than the current price charged to other customers. Vendors may not 
charge Summer EBT participants more for an item than the price in the 
retail environment for all other customers;
    (3) Provide participants supplemental foods deemed eligible for 
Summer EBT via an FNS-approved POM. Supplemental foods authorized for 
the WIC Program by the applicable WIC ITO must meet the requirements 
set forth in this paragraph (a)(3). The POM must identify a list of 
supplemental foods that:
    (i) Contain nutrients determined by nutritional research to be 
lacking in the diets of children, and promote the health of the 
population served by the program, as indicated by relevant nutrition 
science, public health concerns, and cultural eating patterns; and
    (ii) Do not include infant formula and infant foods.
    (b) ITO Summer EBT procedures and operations related to basic 
issuance requirements, reconciliation, benefit redemption, and 
functional and technical EBT system requirements, should be consistent 
with WIC regulations at Sec.  246.12 of this chapter as applicable to 
the benefit delivery model used, to the extent such requirements do not 
conflict with the requirements set forth for ITO Summer EBT agencies in 
this part.
    (c) To ensure effective vendor integrity, the ITO Summer EBT agency 
must set forth a system which ensures:
    (1) Requirements and restrictions on the participation of vendors 
and the transaction of food benefits described at Sec.  246.12 of this 
chapter, apply to activities involving Summer EBT benefits; and
    (2) Vendors are subject to the actions and penalties described at 
Sec.  246.12 of this chapter for noncompliance or violations involving 
Summer EBT benefits; and
    (3) The standards for determination and disposition of claims 
against vendors described at Sec.  246.12 of this chapter apply to 
Summer EBT benefits; or
    (4) Set forth an alternate system to ensure effective vendor 
management and vendor integrity.

Subpart E--General Administrative Requirements


Sec.  292.20  Payments to Summer EBT agencies and use of administrative 
program funds.

    (a) General requirements for grant awards. Grant awards are all 
subject to procedures established by USDA in accordance with 2 CFR part 
200, subpart D, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 
and 415.
    (b) Program benefit funds. FNS shall provide a grant to the Summer 
EBT agency that administers the EBT benefit issuance in an amount equal 
to 100 percent of issued eligible benefit funds as reflected in the 
final POM. Summer EBT benefits must be tracked separately from SNAP 
benefits, or other benefit types.
    (c) State administrative funds. FNS must pay to each Summer EBT 
agency an amount equal to 50 percent of the administrative expenses 
incurred by the Summer EBT agency in operating the program under this 
section, including the administrative expenses of LEAs and other 
agencies in each State or ITO, as applicable, relating to the operation 
of the program under this section. Summer EBT agencies will report 
their incurred administrative expenses on a financial status report. 
Generally, Summer EBT agencies must cover the balance of their 
administrative costs, i.e., their ``match,'' with non-Federal funds.
    (d) Applicable terms and conditions on grant awards. All grant 
awards described in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section shall be 
subject to terms and conditions and standard reporting requirements of 
the Federal grant and Federal-State Agreement.
    (e) Use of State administrative funds--(1) Matching funds. Summer 
EBT agency costs for Federal matching funds may consist of:
    (i) Charges reported on a cash or accrual basis by the Summer EBT 
agency as project costs.
    (ii) Project costs financed with cash contributed or donated to the 
Summer EBT agency.
    (iii) Project costs represented by services and real or personal 
property donated to the Summer EBT agency.
    (2) Cash and in-kind contributions. All cash or in-kind 
contributions except as provided in paragraph (f) of this section must 
be allowable as part of the Summer EBT agency's share of program costs 
when such contributions:
    (i) Are verifiable;

[[Page 90380]]

    (ii) Are not contributed for another federally assisted program, 
unless authorized by Federal legislation;
    (iii) Are necessary and reasonable for accomplishment of project 
objectives;
    (iv) Are charges that would be allowable under this part;
    (v) Are not paid by the Federal Government under another Federal 
award, except where the Federal statute authorizing a program 
specifically provides that Federal funds made available for such 
program can be applied to matching or cost sharing requirements of 
other Federal programs; and
    (vi) Are in the approved budget.
    (f) Volunteer services. The value of services rendered by 
volunteers is unallowable for reimbursement purposes.
    (g) Recovery of funds. The Summer EBT agency must return any 
Federal funds made available under this part which are in excess of 
obligations reported at the end of each fiscal year, in accordance with 
the reconciliation procedures specified in paragraph (h) of this 
section. The Summer EBT agency shall reflect such recoveries by a 
related adjustment in the Summer EBT agency's Letter of Credit.
    (h) Substantiation and reconciliation process. The Summer EBT 
agency must maintain Program records necessary to support 
administrative costs claimed and the reports submitted to USDA under 
this paragraph (h). The Summer EBT agency must ensure such records are 
retained for a period of 3 years or as otherwise specified in Sec.  
292.23. Partnering agencies must also meet these requirements 
consistent with the inter-agency agreement with the Summer EBT agency.


 Sec.  292.21  Standards for financial management systems.

    (a) General. This section prescribes standards for financial 
management systems in administering program funds by the Summer EBT 
agency and its subagencies or contractors.
    (b) Responsibilities. Financial management systems for program 
funds in Summer EBT must provide for the following. The standards in 
this paragraph (b) also apply to subagencies or contractors involved 
with program funding.
    (1) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial 
results of program activities in accordance with Federal reporting 
requirements in Sec.  292.23.
    (2) Records which identify the source and application of funds for 
FNS or Summer EBT agency activities supporting the administration of 
the Program. These records must show authorizations, obligations, 
unobligated balances, assets, liabilities, outlays and income of the 
Summer EBT agency, its sub-agencies and agents.
    (3) Records which identify unallowable costs and offsets resulting 
from FNS or other determinations and the disposition of these amounts. 
Accounting procedures must be in effect to prevent a Summer EBT agency 
from claiming these costs under ongoing program administrative cost 
reports.
    (4) Effective control and accountability by the Summer EBT agency 
for all program funds, property, and other assets acquired with program 
funds. Summer EBT agencies must adequately safeguard all such assets 
and must assure that they are used solely for program-authorized 
purposes unless disposition has been made in accordance with paragraph 
(b)(3) of this section.
    (5) If necessary, Summer EBT agencies will be expected to complete 
an Automated Standard Application for Payment (ASAP) setup form so that 
FNS may set up a Letter of Credit by which Summer EBT funds will be 
made available.
    (6) Controls which minimize the time between the receipt of Federal 
funds from the United States Treasury and their disbursement for 
program costs. In the Letter of Credit system, the Summer EBT agency 
must make drawdowns from the U.S. Treasury through a U.S. Treasury 
Regional Disbursing Office as nearly as possible to the time of making 
the disbursements.
    (7) Procedures to determine the reasonableness, allowability, and 
allocability of costs in accordance with the applicable provisions 
prescribed in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA implementing 
regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415.
    (8) Support and source documents for costs.
    (9) An audit trail including identification of time periods, 
initial and summary accounts, cost determination and allocation 
procedures, cost centers or other accounting procedures to support any 
costs claimed for program administration.
    (10) Periodic audits by qualified individuals who are independent 
of those who maintain Federal program funds as prescribed in Sec.  
292.24(a).
    (11) Methods to resolve audit findings and recommendations and to 
follow up on corrective or preventive actions.
    (12) The standards in this paragraph (b) also apply to subagencies, 
or contractors involved with program funding.
    (13) Identification in Summer EBT agency accounts of all Federal 
awards received and expended and the Federal programs under which they 
were received. Federal program and Federal award identification must 
include, as applicable, the Assistance Listings title and number, 
Federal award identification number and year, name of the Federal 
agency, and name of the pass-through entity, if any.


Sec.  292.22  Performance criteria.

    The Summer EBT agency must monitor and document data on each of the 
following performance criteria:
    (a) Performance Criteria 1--Percentage of children eligible for 
Summer EBT benefits who participated by using their benefits at least 
once.
    (b) Performance Criteria 2--Percentage of Summer EBT benefits that 
are issued to children not eligible for Summer EBT.
    (c) Performance Criteria 3--Percentage of children issued benefits 
who receive their first issuance before the start of the summer 
operational period.
    (d) Performance Criteria 4--Percentage of eligible children who can 
be identified through streamlined certification who are enrolled 
without further application.


Sec.  292.23  Records and reports.

    (a) Summer EBT agencies and LEAs may retain necessary records in 
their original or electronic form.
    (b) Summer EBT agency records must be retained for a period of 3 
years after the date of submission of the final Financial Reports for 
the fiscal year. If audit and investigation findings have not been 
resolved, the records must be retained beyond the 3-year period as long 
as is required for the resolution of the issues raised by the audit or 
investigation.
    (c) Summer EBT agencies receiving Federal awards will be required 
to submit periodic financial management planning and reporting 
documentation in the Food Program Reporting System (FPRS), on standard 
schedules that will be announced annually.
    (d) For Summer EBT Administrative Grants, Summer EBT agencies will 
be required to submit an expenditure plan for State expenditure 
planning by August 15th, prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. 
Regional approval for those documents will set funding levels for the 
Summer EBT agency. These documents may be amended on a rolling basis 
throughout the year as agency needs evolve.
    (e) State Administrative Grant expenditures will be reported to FNS

[[Page 90381]]

quarterly on a Summer EBT financial status report.
    (f) Summer EBT agencies must report participation and issuance on a 
monthly basis.


Sec.  292.24  Audits and management control evaluations.

    (a) Audits. Summer EBT agencies must arrange for audits of their 
own operations to be conducted in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, 
subpart F, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 
415. Unless otherwise exempt, LEAs must arrange for audits to be 
conducted in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart F, and USDA 
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415. Summer EBT 
agencies must provide the USDA Office of the Inspector General (OIG) 
with full opportunity to audit the Summer EBT agency and LEAs. Unless 
otherwise exempt, audits at the Summer EBT agency and LEA levels must 
be conducted in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart F and appendix 
XI, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415. While 
OIG must rely to the fullest extent feasible upon Summer EBT agency-
sponsored or LEA-sponsored audits, it must, when considered necessary:
    (1) Make audits on a State or ITO-wide basis;
    (2) Perform on-site test audits; and
    (3) Review audit reports and related working papers of audits 
performed by or for Summer EBT agencies.
    (b) Management control evaluations. Summer EBT agencies must 
provide USDA with full opportunity to conduct management control 
evaluations of all operations of the Summer EBT agency and must provide 
OIG with full opportunity to conduct audits of all Summer EBT agency 
Program operations. The Summer EBT agency must make available its 
records, including records of the receipts and expenditures of funds, 
upon a reasonable request by USDA.
    (c) Error reduction strategies. USDA may omit designated areas of 
review, in part or entirely, where a Summer EBT agency has implemented 
FNS-approved error reduction strategies.


Sec.  292.25  Investigations.

    The Summer EBT agency must promptly investigate complaints received 
or irregularities noted in connection with the operation of the Program 
and must take appropriate action to correct any irregularities. The 
Summer EBT agency must maintain on file all evidence relating to such 
investigations and actions. The Summer EBT agency must inform the 
appropriate FNSRO of any suspected fraud or criminal abuse in the 
Program which would result in a loss or misuse of Federal funds. The 
Department may make investigations at the request of the Summer EBT 
agency, or where the Department determines investigations are 
appropriate.


Sec.  292.26  Hearing procedure for families and Summer EBT agencies.

    (a) Each Summer EBT agency must establish a fair hearing procedure 
that is applicable to the State or ITO program as a whole. Fair hearing 
procedures must:
    (1) Allow a household to appeal, within 90 days after the end of 
the summer operational period, a decision made with respect to:
    (i)(A) An application the household has made for Summer EBT 
benefits;
    (B) A streamlined certification for Summer EBT benefits; or
    (C) A verification process or procedure.
    (ii) Any adverse action taken against the household by the Summer 
EBT agency.
    (2) Require the State to provide a household with back-benefits for 
Summer EBT if the fair hearing determines that the Summer EBT agency 
erroneously failed to issue such benefits in the correct amount to an 
eligible family, an administrative disqualification for intentional 
Program violation was subsequently reversed, or if there is a statement 
elsewhere in this part specifically stating that the household is 
entitled to restoration of lost benefits.
    (b) In response to an appeal, the Summer EBT agency may defend its 
initial decision to deny the eligibility of the child for Summer EBT 
benefits or take an adverse action against a household. The fair 
hearing procedure must provide for both the household and the Summer 
EBT agency:
    (1) A simple, publicly announced method to make an oral or written 
request for a hearing;
    (2) An opportunity to be assisted or represented by an attorney or 
other person;
    (3) An opportunity to examine, prior to and during the hearing, any 
documents and records presented to support the decision under appeal;
    (4) That the hearing must be held with reasonable promptness and 
convenience, and that adequate notice must be given as to the time and 
place of the hearing;
    (5) An opportunity to present oral or documentary evidence and 
arguments supporting a position without undue interference;
    (6) An opportunity to question or refute any testimony or other 
evidence and to confront and cross-examine any adverse witnesses;
    (7) That the hearing must be conducted and the decision made by a 
hearing official who did not participate in making the decision under 
appeal or in any previously held conference;
    (8) That the decision of the hearing official must be based on the 
oral and documentary evidence presented at the hearing and made a part 
of the hearing record;
    (9) That the parties concerned and any designated representative 
must be notified in writing of the decision of the hearing official;
    (10) That a written record must be prepared with respect to each 
hearing, which must include the challenge or the decision under appeal, 
any documentary evidence and a summary of any oral testimony presented 
at the hearing, the decision of the hearing official, including the 
reasons therefor, and a copy of the notification to the parties 
concerned of the decision of the hearing official; and
    (11) That the written record of each hearing must be preserved for 
a period of 3 years and must be available for examination by the 
parties concerned or their representatives at any reasonable time and 
place during that period.
    (12) That the household may request a conference to provide the 
opportunity for the household to discuss the situation, present 
information, and obtain an explanation of the data submitted in the 
application or the decision rendered. The request for a conference must 
not in any way prejudice or diminish the right to a fair hearing. The 
Summer EBT agency must promptly schedule a fair hearing, if requested.
    (13) Any communication with households related to fair hearings 
must be in an understandable and uniform format and, to the maximum 
extent practicable, in a language that parents and guardians can 
understand.


Sec.  292.27  Claims.

    (a) Basis for claims. Summer EBT agencies are responsible to ensure 
that program benefits are provided only to eligible children and in the 
correct amount in accordance with program regulations in this part. 
Erroneous issuances include, but are not limited to:
    (1) Benefits issued to ineligible children or in the incorrect 
amount.
    (2) Duplicate benefit issuances, including situations where the 
Summer EBT agency allows an eligible household to access more than one

[[Page 90382]]

Summer EBT account for the same time period, or an eligible household 
receives program benefits from more than one State or ITO for the same 
time period.
    (b) Claims against Summer EBT agencies. (1) USDA may hold Summer 
EBT agencies liable for erroneous payments. USDA may pursue erroneous 
claims in the aggregate when merited, based on the nature of the error 
that gave rise to the over-issuance, the size of the error, and whether 
such action would advance program purposes.
    (2) Summer EBT agencies must develop a process to allow households 
to submit a claim for benefits that were not issued or issued in the 
incorrect amount.
    (c) Claims against households. (1) Summer EBT agencies must develop 
a process to manage cases of erroneous issuances and pursue claims 
against a household, as appropriate.
    (2) Summer EBT agencies have the discretion to determine when to 
pursue a claim based on cost effectiveness or the individual 
circumstances. To the maximum extent practicable, Summer EBT agencies 
should limit claims against households to situations where there is 
evidence that the household knowingly obtained benefits through 
fraudulent activities.
    (i) Summer EBT agencies must include in their POM submission a 
proposed plan for identifying instances of fraudulent activity for use 
in pursuing claims against households.
    (ii) Procedures described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section 
must outline steps the Summer EBT agency will take to ensure that Civil 
Rights provision at Sec.  292.29(a) are upheld.
    (3) Summer EBT agencies must not reclaim Summer EBT benefits by 
reducing a household's SNAP, NAP, or WIC benefit.


Sec.  292.28  Procurement standards.

    (a) Applicability of the Advance Planning Document (APD) process. 
If an EBT services contract established for the purpose of benefit 
issuance includes Summer EBT, the State Systems Advance Planning 
Document (APD) process must be followed in accordance with Sec.  
292.11(b)(3) for States and Sec.  292.11(u) for ITOs, respectively.
    (b) General requirements on the procurement of goods and services 
with Federal funds. All other Summer EBT agency and local agency costs, 
including eligibility systems, must comply with the requirements of 
this part and 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA implementing 
regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415, as applicable, which implement 
the applicable requirements concerning the procurement of all goods and 
services with Federal funds.
    (c) Contractual responsibilities. The standards contained in this 
part and 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA implementing regulations 
in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415, as applicable, do not relieve any Summer 
EBT agency or local agency of any contractual responsibilities under 
its contracts. The Summer EBT agency or local agency is the responsible 
authority, without recourse to USDA, regarding the settlement and 
satisfaction of all contractual and administrative issues arising out 
of procurements entered into in connection with the Program. This 
includes, but is not limited to, source evaluation, protests, disputes, 
claims, or other matters of a contractual nature. Matters concerning 
violation of law are to be referred to the local, State, or Federal 
authority that has proper jurisdiction.
    (d) Procedures. The Summer EBT agency must follow either the State 
or ITO laws, policies and procedures as authorized by 2 CFR 200.317, or 
the procurement standards for other governmental grantees and all 
governmental subgrantees in accordance with 2 CFR 200.318 through 
200.326. Regardless of the option selected, Summer EBT agencies must 
ensure that all contracts include any clauses required by Federal 
statutes and Executive orders and that the requirements in 2 CFR 
200.236 and 2 CFR part 200, appendix II, are followed.


Sec.  292.29  Miscellaneous administrative provisions.

    (a) Civil rights. In the operation of the Program, no child may be 
denied benefits or be otherwise discriminated against because of race, 
color, national origin, age, sex, or disability. Summer EBT agencies 
and LEAs must comply with the requirements of: Title VI of the Civil 
Rights Act of 1964; title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972; 
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Age Discrimination 
Act of 1975; and Department of Agriculture regulations on 
nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts 15, 15a, and 15b).
    (b) Program evaluations. States, ITOs, Summer EBT agencies, LEAs, 
schools, and contractors must cooperate in studies and evaluations 
conducted by or on behalf of the Department related to programs 
authorized under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act or 
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966.
    (c) General responsibilities. The criminal penalties and provisions 
established in section 12(g) of the Richard B. Russell National School 
Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1760(g)) provide that whoever embezzles, willfully 
misapplies, steals, or obtains by fraud any funds, assets, or property 
that are the subject of a grant or other form of assistance under the 
Act or the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), 
whether received directly or indirectly from the United States 
Department of Agriculture, or whoever receives, conceals, or retains 
such funds, assets, or property to personal use or gain, knowing such 
funds, assets, or property have been embezzled, willfully misapplied, 
stolen, or obtained by fraud must, if such funds, assets, or property 
are of the value of $100 or more, be fined not more than $25,000 or 
imprisoned not more than five years, or both, or, if such funds, 
assets, or property are of a value of less than $100, must be fined not 
more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.


Sec.  292.30  Severability.

    Any provision of this part held to be invalid or unenforceable as 
applied to any person or circumstance shall be construed so as to 
continue to give the maximum effect to the provision permitted by law, 
including as applied to persons not similarly situated or to dissimilar 
circumstances, unless such holding is that the provision of this part 
is invalid and unenforceable in all circumstances, in which event the 
provision shall be severable from the remainder of this part and shall 
not affect the remainder thereof.


Sec.  292.31  [Reserved]

Cynthia Long,
Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.

    Note:  This appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal 
Regulations.


[[Page 90383]]



Appendix A--Regulatory Impact Analysis

Statement of Need

    The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328) 
requires the Secretary of Agriculture to make available an option to 
States to provide summer meals for non-congregate meal service in 
rural areas with no congregate meal service and to establish a 
permanent summer electronic benefits transfer for children program 
(Summer EBT) for the purpose of ensuring continued access to food 
when school is not in session for the summer. This interim final 
rule amends the Summer Food Service (SFSP) and National School Lunch 
Program's Seamless Summer Option (SSO) regulations in 7 CFR parts 
210, 220, and 225 to codify the flexibility for rural program 
operators to provide non-congregate meal service in the SFSP and 
SSO. This rule also establishes 7 CFR part 292 and codifies the 
Summer EBT Program in this part.

Background

    Ample research supports the effectiveness of programs like the 
National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program 
(SBP) in improving food security of participating children during 
the school year.<SUP>16 17 18</SUP> Despite substantial expansion of 
summer meal programs in recent years, just 1 in 6 children who eat 
free or reduced-price school meals participates in summer meal 
programs in a typical year.\19\ There is evidence to suggest that 
food insecurity among children increases in the summer months and 
that participation in nutrition programs such as the SFSP can reduce 
rates of food insecurity, and particularly its most severe 
forms.<SUP>20 21 22 23 24</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Arteaga, Irma, and Colleen Heflin (2014). Participation in 
the National School Lunch Program and food security: An analysis of 
transitions into kindergarten. Children and Youth Services Review, 
47, 224-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.09.014.
    \17\ Gunderson, C., Kreider, B., & and Pepper, J. (2012). The 
impact of the National School Lunch Program on child health: A 
nonparametric bounds analysis. Journal of Econometrics 166(1): 79-
91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2011.06.007.
    \18\ Bartfeld, J., & Ryu, J. (2011). The School Breakfast 
Program and Breakfast-Skipping among Wisconsin Elementary School 
Children. Social Service Review 85(4):619-634. https://doi.org/10.1086/663635.
    \19\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2019). USDA Highlights 
Importance of Keeping Kids Fed During Summer Months. U.S. Department 
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://
www.fns.usda.gov/pressrelease/2019/fns-
000719#:~:text=During%20the%20academic%20year%2C%20approximately,in%2
0the%20summer%20meal%20programs.
    \20\ Huang, J., Barnidge, E., & Kim, Y. (2015). Children 
Receiving Free or Reduced Price Meals Have Higher Food Insufficiency 
Rates in Summer. The Journal of Nutrition 145: 2161-2168. https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.115.214486.
    \21\ Nord, M., & Romig, K. (2006). Hunger in the Summer: 
Seasonal Food Insecurity and the National School Lunch and Summer 
Food Service Programs. Journal of Children & Poverty 12(2): 141-158. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/10796120600879582.
    \22\ Miller, D.P. (2016). Accessibility of summer meals and the 
food insecurity of low-income households with children. Public 
Health Nutrition 19(11): 2079-2089. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980016000033.
    \23\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2021). USDA Summer Meals Study 
Summary. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. 
https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/SummerMealsStudy-2018-SummaryofFindings.pdf.
    \24\ Turner, L., & Calvert, H.G. (2019). The Academic, 
Behavioral, and Health Influence of Summer Child Nutrition Programs: 
A Narrative Review and Proposed Research and Policy Agenda. Journal 
of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 119(6): 972-983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2019.02.006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since 2011, the USDA has administered Summer EBT demonstration 
projects in collaboration with State agencies \25\ and Indian Tribal 
Organizations \26\ with the goals of reducing or eliminating food 
insecurity and hunger and improving nutritional status among 
participating children. Authorized and funded by the 2010 
Agriculture Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 111-80), these demonstration 
projects have been rigorously evaluated over the course of a decade 
and have proven successful at mitigating food insecurity and 
improving diet quality. Evaluation findings show that Summer EBT 
benefits reduce the most severe category of food insecurity by one-
third among participating children, compared with those receiving no 
benefits, and indicate that this model could be effectively 
implemented in a wide variety of communities.<SUP>27 28</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ For the purpose of this analysis, State agency refers to 
State agencies administering the SFSP and Summer EBT agencies, 
including Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) administering Summer 
EBT.
    \26\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department 
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
    \27\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2016). Summer Electronic 
Benefit Transfer for Children (SEBTC) Demonstration: Summary Report. 
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/ops/sebtcfinalreport.pdf.
    \28\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2020). Summer Electronic 
Benefit Transfer for Children Evaluation: Final Report. U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The USDA has also initiated other demonstration projects to 
improve the reach and impact of summer meal programs under section 
749(g) of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and 
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. 
L. 111-80; 123 Stat. 2132). One demonstration project was the 
Enhanced Summer Food Service Program (eSFSP), which tested changes 
to the existing structure and delivery mechanism of SFSP for the 
purpose of determining effects on program participation. The eSFSP 
included the Meal Delivery demonstration which offered breakfast and 
lunch delivery to homes of eligible children in rural areas, as well 
as the Food Backpack demonstration which provided weekend and 
holiday meals to SFSP participants for consumption when SFSP sites 
were not open.
    In 2013, Non-Congregate Feeding for Outdoor Summer Feeding Sites 
Experiencing Excess Heat was implemented, allowing SFSP and Seamless 
Summer Option (SSO) sponsors operating approved outdoor meal sites 
without temperature-controlled alternate sites to operate as non-
congregate sites during conditions of excessive heat.\29\ In 2019, 
this demonstration was expanded to allow sites in four States to 
operate as non-congregate due to smoke and air quality concerns. In 
more recent years, USDA implemented Meals-to-You (MTY) under the 
demonstration authority. MTY was developed in response to 
stakeholder feedback about the challenges and difficulties of 
serving summer meals in sparsely populated communities and remote 
areas. Through MTY, food boxes were mailed directly to families of 
children who were eligible for free or reduced price school meals. 
Each eligible child received a weekly box, which contained five 
breakfast meals, five snacks, and five lunch/supper meals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2019, May 29). Demonstration 
Project for Non-Congregate Feeding for Outdoor Summer Meal Sites 
Experiencing Excessive Heat with Questions & Answers. Policy memo SP 
28-2019, SFSP 13-2019. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and 
Nutrition Services. https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/demonstration-
project-non-congregate-feeding-outdoor-summer-meal-
sites#:~:text=Non%2Dcongregate%20meal%20service%20shall,outdoor%20mea
l%20site%20is%20located.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These non-congregate meal service projects offered potential 
solutions to some of the most common challenges related to summer 
meal service, including transportation and geographical access 
issues, that can act as barriers to sustained participation in 
summer meal programs. USDA research has shown that access to meal 
sites is a significant challenge to participation and is often 
exacerbated in rural areas where fewer sites and more limited 
transportation options exist.<SUP>30 31</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Miller, D.P. (2016). Accessibility of summer meals and the 
food insecurity of low-income households with children. Public 
Health Nutrition 19(11): 2079-2089. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980016000033.
    \31\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2019). SFSP Characteristics 
Study. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. 
https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/summer-food-service-program-characteristics-study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the COVID-19 public health emergency, many requirements 
pertaining to child nutrition programs were waived to protect public 
health and ensure continued access to healthy foods for children and 
families. The availability of such waivers, including those that 
permitted non-congregate meal service and the ability to provide 
more than one meal at a time, were cited by State agencies as an 
important factor in reducing barriers for kids and families to 
access meals and increasing program participation.<SUP>32 33</SUP> 
Also introduced in

[[Page 90384]]

response to the pandemic was Pandemic EBT, a program which 
successfully provided food benefits through EBT to families of 
eligible school children when children missed school due to COVID-19 
related illness or when schools were closed or operating with 
reduced hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Child Nutrition Program 
Operations During the COVID-19 Pandemic, March through September 
2020: School Meals Operations Study, Year 1 Report. U.S. Department 
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://www.mathematica.org/publications/child-nutrition-program-operations-during-the-covid-19-pandemic-march-through-september-2020-school.
    \33\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2022). Summer Food Service 
Program Integrity Study. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and 
Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/integrity-study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Due in part to the precedent set by demonstration projects, the 
favorable findings of rigorous evaluations, and the positive impact 
of regulatory waivers exercised during the COVID-19 pandemic, the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328) authorized 
both a non-congregate meal service option at SFSP and SSO sites in 
rural areas and a permanent Summer EBT program.

Summary of Impacts

    In total, the 10-year cost of the interim final rule is 
estimated at approximately $40.3 billion, with $7.4 billion 
attributed to non-congregate meal option implementation ($7.35 
billion for program meals and $43.2 million for provision 
administration) and $32.9 billion in costs attributed to Summer EBT 
implementation ($28.0 billion for program benefits and $5.0 billion 
for program implementation and administration) (see Table 1). These 
costs represent the operation of both provisions over a ten-year 
period between Fiscal Years (FY) 2023 and 2032, though it should be 
noted that Summer EBT will not be implemented until 2024 and 
therefore all analyses pertaining to Summer EBT represent only nine 
years of program operation. Though some States may have already 
incurred costs in FY 2023 preparing for the implementation of Summer 
EBT in FY 2024, it is assumed that the administrative costs 
estimated in FY 2024 are representative of the total cost of program 
implementation occurring either during or prior to Summer EBT 
rollout.
    The non-congregate meal provision is expected to increase 
participation among eligible populations in rural sites by 4.25 
million children by 2027 (Year 5) at a cost of $1.0 billion in 
associated meal reimbursements, for a total increase in Federal 
Summer Food Service Program reimbursements of $7.35 billion over the 
course of ten years. Annual administrative burden to households adds 
only marginally to these costs--between $0.2 million and $4.7 
million annually, for a total of $29.3 million over ten years. In 
addition, we estimate one-time costs for modifying State systems to 
accommodate non-congregate meal service. We estimate those costs 
will average $250,000 per State agency based on past internal 
analyses of regulatory changes with similar implementation 
mechanisms, totaling $14.0 million across all 56 State agencies in 
Year 1 (2023).\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Food and Nutrition Service. (July 24, 2019.) (AE62) 
Revision of Categorical Eligibility in SNAP Regulatory Impact 
Analysis (FNS-2018-0037-0002). U.S. Department of Agriculture Food 
and Nutrition Service. https://www.regulations.gov/document/FNS-2018-0037-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is expected that 25.0 million children out of approximately 
30.1 million considered eligible will receive Summer EBT benefits, 
resulting in between $2.8 and $3.4 billion in benefits distributed 
each summer period for a total cost of $28.0 billion in benefits 
over nine years.\35\ Program implementation and administration 
costs, which include initial start-up costs equal to 30% of benefits 
administered and ongoing administrative costs equal to 7% of 
benefits administered, are expected to peak at $1.0 billion in the 
first year of program operation (2024) and level off at $366 million 
by 2028. This includes expected administrative burden for Summer EBT 
retailers due to reporting and recordkeeping at $8.9 million, while 
the expected household burden of administrative tasks required for 
program participation (e.g., applications) for children not already 
certified as Free and Reduced-Price eligible is estimated at $149 
million. The retailer costs are expected to be incurred primarily in 
Year 1 (2024) and are reflected as such in Table 1. Total annual 
costs for Summer EBT benefits and administration are estimated at 
between $3.5 and $3.8 billion annually for a total nine-year cost of 
$32.9 billion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Students attending schools operating year-round may also 
receive Summer EBT during other breaks occurring outside of typical 
summer months, subject to USDA approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rule is expected to yield substantial public benefit, 
including improvements in nutrition security and diet quality and 
economic growth via retail transactions. These benefits are 
discussed further in section V. (Benefits of the Interim Final 
Rule).
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.049

    As required by OMB Circular A-4, in Table 2 below the Department 
has prepared an accounting statement showing the annualized 
estimates of benefits, costs, and transfers associated with the 
provisions of this rule. Meal costs and Summer EBT

[[Page 90385]]

benefit payments are categorized as transfers in the table below. 
The next section provides an impact analysis for each change.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.050

Section by Section Analysis

    The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328) 
provides flexibility for summer meal sites in rural areas to provide 
a non-congregate meal service, which means allowing children to take 
meals off-site, for example, to their homes. The Act also authorized 
an entirely new method for offering additional summer nutrition 
assistance for children. The new Summer EBT program will provide 
benefits on EBT cards so that families can purchase food for their 
children to eat. Together, these changes will revolutionize how our 
nation supports the nutritional needs of children during the summer 
months when school is not in session. Because the Act directed the 
Summer EBT program to begin operation in 2024 and the non-congregate 
meal service option in rural areas was made available in 2023, there 
has not been a formal opportunity for public comment prior to the 
development of the interim final rule. However, the Food and 
Nutrition Service (FNS) hosted 24 listening sessions on Summer EBT 
and 21 listening sessions on non-congregate summer meals with 
external stakeholders and gathered input from school food 
authorities and summer meal program sponsors, advocacy groups, 
program participants, and State agencies administering the 
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Special 
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children 
(WIC), and Child Nutrition Programs. FNS also consulted with Tribal 
leaders on Summer EBT in May 2023 and attended two conferences to 
meet with and hear from ITOs administering WIC.

Key Assumptions

Baseline

Non-Congregate Meal Service

    The baseline year providing data to predict the 1, 5, and 10-
Year costs associated with non-congregate meal service 
implementation is FY 2022, as this is the most recent year for which 
complete data on SFSP and SSO participation is available. Peak 
program participation from July 2022 was used as a proxy for total 
participation in summer meal programs, as this month sees the 
highest participation level across summer months.\36\ Total rural 
participation was estimated by applying the percentage of total 
students enrolled in rural schools, as calculated in a dataset 
produced by the most recent FNS School Nutrition and Meal Cost 
Study.\37\ Estimated SSO meals, total meals, and rural meals were 
calculated based on the ratio of participation to meals served in 
SFSP.\38\ Participation in SFSP has largely returned to pre-pandemic 
levels (see Table 3) and there is not sufficient evidence to suggest 
that participation would change in any predictable way over the 
course of the next five to 10 years in the absence of the rule. For 
this reason, peak (July) SFSP and SSO participation, meals served, 
and the proportion of eligible children who live in rural areas are 
assumed to remain constant in the baseline scenario (see Table 3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Child Nutrition Tables. 
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/child-nutrition-tables.
    \37\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2019). School Nutrition and 
Meal Cost Study. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition 
Service. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/SNMCS_Summary-Findings.pdf.
    \38\ Though data was adjusted to exclude any months in which 
schools may have been utilizing summer meals programs during the 
regular school year, the 2022 baseline estimate may marginally 
overestimate participation and meals served due to the waivers and 
regulatory flexibilities afforded by the Keep Kids Fed Act, 
including the Area Eligibility waivers. For example, in FY 2019, 
peak (July) SFSP participation was 2,685,000 and peak (July) SSO 
participation was 1,053,641 children, compared with 2,727,000 and 
1,425,872 children, respectively, in FY 2022.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 90386]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.051

Summer EBT

    The baseline year providing data to predict the 1, 5, and 10-
Year costs associated with Summer EBT implementation is FY 2023. The 
number of students certified as eligible for free meals and the 
number certified as eligible for reduced-price meals FY 2023 is 
reported on form FNS-10: Report of School Program Operations.\39\ 
The total number of students certified as free or reduced-price 
eligible is largely consistent with pre-pandemic levels (FY 2019); 
as there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that they will change 
significantly over the course of the next five to ten years, they 
are assumed to remain constant for the sake of the analysis (see 
Table 4). However, factors that could affect this assumption are the 
increased adoption of State policies providing school meals to all 
children at no charge and the expansion of the Community Eligibility 
Provision in September 2023. These are discussed further in section 
VI. (Uncertainties/Limitations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). FNS-10: Report of 
School Program Operations. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and 
Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/form/report-school-program-operations.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.052

Interim Final Rule

Non-Congregate Meal Service

Meal Reimbursement Costs

    FNS expects to see a substantial increase in reimbursements for 
meals served to children during the summer due to increased 
participation among populations eligible for non-congregate meals. 
Because July 2023 SFSP and SSO participation data were unavailable 
at the time of this analysis, expected participation was estimated 
using alternate methods. Estimated increases in participation 
through Year 3 (2025) are based in part on the increase in 
participation that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, when 
waivers--most notably, the Child Nutrition Area Eligibility Waivers, 
which allowed States to waive summer meal programs requirements 
limiting ``open site'' meal service to areas in which at least half 
of all children are from low-income households--were implemented 
across all summer meals sites (see Table 5).\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2020). Child Nutrition Area 
Eligibility Waivers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and 
Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/child-nutrition-area-eligibility-waiver.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 90387]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.053

    The observed increase in participation between 2019 and 2021 
(96.8%) is used as a proxy for the expected increase in 
participation in newly eligible rural areas only during the first 
three years of the non-congregate option availability (FY 2023-
2025).\41\ This estimate is considered an upper bound, as the 
increases in participation during the pandemic may have been due in 
part to increased levels of financial hardship and food insecurity 
that were present during this time. It should also be noted that 
other waivers in place during this time, such as Area Eligibility 
waivers, which served a purpose distinct from non-congregate meal 
service and are no longer in effect, may have increased 
participation rates.\42\ For this reason, we predict this 
participation increase will happen more gradually than the increase 
observed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ Though there is a comparable increase in summer meal 
program participation between FY 2019 and FY 2020, the first year 
non-congregate waivers were available, data from FY 2020 is 
generally considered less reliable due to extenuating circumstances 
surrounding the COVID-19 public health emergency. For practical 
purposes, the calculated participation increase of 96.8% is assumed 
to occur over the span of one to two years.
    \42\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2022). Nationwide Waiver to 
Extend Area Eligibility Waivers for Summer 2022 Operators--Extension 
5. U.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service. 
https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/covid-19-child-nutrition-response-107.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From Year 1 of implementation (2023), we assume it will take 
until Year 3 (2025) to reach the expected increase of 96.8% and it 
will take until Year 5 (2027) to reach expected maximum 
participation. Expected maximum participation is based on the 
estimated total number of children eligible for non-congregate meal 
service (see Table 6). Of all eligible children, we estimate that 
about 65 percent will participate on an average day. This take-up 
rate is somewhat higher than general take-up of school meals, 
measured as the ratio of average daily participation to total 
enrollment in NSLP schools, but consistent with the percentage of 
students who choose to take meals when they are made available at no 
charge to all students via the Community Eligibility Provision 
(CEP).\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2022). Summer Food Service 
Program Integrity Study. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and 
Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/integrity-study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on this percentage, the maximum number of eligible 
students who might be expected to participate in non-congregate 
summer meals is 4.88 million, and the number of eligible students 
expected to newly participate in summer meals (accounting for the 
631,000 students who would be considered eligible but are already 
participating at baseline) is 4.25 million. See Table 6 for the full 
list of estimates and assumptions based on program data and outputs 
from the FNS School Nutrition and Meal Cost Study dataset.\18\ For 
the purpose of the analysis, the cost of meals served is based on 
Federal SFSP reimbursement rates, rather than SSO reimbursement 
rates, as SFSP meal pattern requirements are more conducive to 
``grab and go'' packaged meals and will likely be used by most sites 
choosing to serve non-congregate meals.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.054


[[Page 90388]]



Implementation and Administrative Costs

    Administrative reporting and recordkeeping burdens for State 
agencies resulting from the non-congregate provision in Year 1 
(2023) include State agency identification, pre-approval (when 
necessary), approval, reporting and documentation of eligible sites 
in rural areas. Sponsor burdens include submission of rural site 
documentation, information collection to determine child 
eligibility, conduction of pre-operational site visits for new 
sites, and reporting on meals distributed. Household burdens, which 
are expected to be minimal, include providing written consent to 
participate in the home delivery option of non-congregate meal 
service. Reporting and recordkeeping costs associated with 
administering the non-congregate option are based on the household 
burden estimates discussed in the Paperwork Reduction Act section of 
the interim final rule (see Table 7).\44\ Costs attributable to 
household burden are prorated in Years 1-4 to reflect expected 
participation levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Costs exclude ongoing reporting and recordkeeping for State 
agencies as those costs will be absorbed through normal funding 
streams. Costs also exclude administrative burden for sponsors and 
program operators as those costs are factored into per meal 
reimbursements.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.055

    In addition, there are estimated one-time costs of $14.0 million 
associated with shifting State systems to accommodate non-congregate 
meal service in Year 1 (2023). These costs are based on previous 
Regulatory Impact Analyses conducted on the proposed revision of 
Categorical Eligibility in SNAP and are expected to be borne 
primarily by State agencies.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ Food and Nutrition Service. (July 24, 2019.) (AE62) 
Revision of Categorical Eligibility in SNAP Regulatory Impact 
Analysis (FNS-2018-0037-0002). U.S. Department of Agriculture Food 
and Nutrition Service. https://www.regulations.gov/document/FNS-2018-0037-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summer EBT

Benefit Costs

    Projected 1, 5, and 10-year costs of Summer EBT benefits are 
primarily dependent upon State or ITO participation, the participant 
take-up rate, and the participant benefit redemption rate. This 
analysis assumes that all State agencies will implement Summer EBT 
in the first year of the program (2024) and that participation is 
sustained at this level through the time horizon of this analysis 
(2032) resulting in a State agency take-up rate of 100 percent for 
all years 2024-2032. Although not all States may implement the 
program in the first year, the analysis presents the full potential 
impact of the rule as all States are statutorily permitted to 
implement the program.
    Meanwhile, the best estimates of participation among ITOs are 
derived from demonstration projects and other engagement of ITOs, 
which indicate that a limited number of ITOs will independently 
implement Summer EBT in the first year. Best estimates indicate that 
four ITOs will participate in Year 1 (2024), increasing to 15 ITOs 
participating by the end of the period of analysis (2032). For the 
purpose of this analysis, this has minimal impact on overall 
administrative costs, as administrative costs are calculated as a 
percentage of benefits distributed, which reflect student 
participation independent of which entity is administering the 
program. A sensitivity analysis around these assumptions is included 
elsewhere in this analysis, which accounts for a more gradual phase-
in of the Summer EBT program among States (see section VI. 
(Uncertainties and Limitations), Tables 14-15).
    Participant take-up (i.e., the share of eligible children who 
are enrolled and participate by spending any amount of Summer EBT 
benefits) is estimated based on two studies of Summer EBT 
demonstration projects.\46\ The first study of Summer EBT 
demonstration projects occurring between 2011 and 2014 provided a 
range of participant take-up rates of children who are enrolled in 
Summer EBT via passive enrollment and a separate range for those 
enrolled via active enrollment.\47\ This study showed that the 
average participant take-up rate via passive enrollment was 93.5% 
(ranging from 90% to 97% in demonstration projects) and the average 
participant take-up rate via active enrollment was 40% (ranging from 
23% to 57%).\48\ It is expected that streamline certification will 
account for 80% of Summer EBT enrollment and enrollment through 
Summer EBT applications will account for the remaining 20% of 
enrollment, which is reflective of the approximate ratio of students 
who are certified free or reduced-price to those who are eligible 
but must apply (e.g., students who have not been certified or 
submitted applications for the NSLP because they are able to receive 
free meals through CEP or are enrolled in Provision 2 or 3 schools). 
Combining the passive enrollment take-up rate (93.5% for the passive 
enrollment children) and the active enrollment take-up rate (40% for 
the active enrollment children) results in a weighted average 
participant take-up of 83%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ While demonstration projects were not nationally 
representative, they were implemented in a broad set of communities 
in numerous States (Connecticut, Michigan, Missouri, Oregon, and 
Texas beginning in 2011; Delaware, Nevada, and Washington beginning 
in 2012) and ITOs (Cherokee Nation and Chickasaw Nation beginning in 
2012).
    \47\ During the SEBT demonstrations, grantees chose a process to 
enroll eligible children. Grantees with active enrollment asked 
households to return a form indicating they wanted to participate in 
the demonstration. Households that did not return the form were 
excluded from the demonstration. Under permanent SEBT, eligible 
children who are not individually certified as such, including those 
enrolled in CEP or Provision 2 or 3 schools, can submit a Summer EBT 
application to indicate their interest in participating. For passive 
enrollment under the demonstrations, eligible children were 
automatically included in the demonstration unless they returned a 
form saying that they did not want to be included. Similarly, in 
permanent SEBT, many eligible children will be enrolled through 
administrative data (streamlined certification) and can then choose 
to opt out of receiving benefits.
    \48\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department 
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The second study of the Summer EBT demonstration projects 
occurring between 2015 and 2018 yielded an overall participant take-
up rate of 84.5%.\49\ Though similar to the estimate generated by 
the prior study, this does not account for the small number of 
students that may participate via ITOs and will therefore utilize a 
food package model (rather than electronic benefits), which yields 
lower participation rates. For this reason, the lower. estimate of 
83% is used in the analysis. Alternative scenarios presented in 
section VI. (Uncertainties and Limitations), Tables 14-15 estimate 
the potential impacts of lower participant up-take rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2016). Summer Electronic 
Benefit Transfer for Children (SEBTC) Demonstration: Summary Report. 
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/ops/sebtcfinalreport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the study of Summer EBT demonstration projects 
occurring between 2011 and 2014 found that among enrolled 
participants, between 92 and 93 percent of all benefits issued are 
redeemed, resulting in an average benefit redemption rate of 92.5

[[Page 90389]]

percent.\50\ Benefits not redeemed are expunged according to the 
procedural methods and timelines determined by State agencies, in 
accordance with the regulations provided within the rule, and are 
therefore not included in the total benefit cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department 
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total annual cost of benefits to the Federal Government is 
then calculated as follows:

(Number of free and reduced-price participants) x (% State take-up 
rate) x (% Participant take-up rate) x
(% Benefit redemption rate) x ($ Monthly benefit) x (Months of 
benefits)

    All estimates assume participating children receive three months 
of benefits. For FY 2024, benefit amounts are $40 per month. These 
estimates are adjusted for inflation according to the Thrifty Food 
Plan estimates in the 2024 President's Budget.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ White House, United States. (2023). The 2024 Mid-Session 
Review. White House, United States. https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2023/07/28/the-2024-mid-session-review/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation and Administrative Costs

    The anticipated implementation and administrative costs of the 
Summer EBT program were estimated based on programs serving similar 
populations and operating with similar systems and technology, 
including the Summer EBT demonstration projects, Pandemic EBT 
benefit program, and SNAP. Estimates assume that Year 1 (2024) 
implementation costs will be higher, equal to 30% of total benefits 
issued, due to the wider scope of activities required to set up 
Summer EBT, including establishing or modifying data systems to 
identify eligible children and process Summer EBT benefits, 
developing Summer EBT applications and establishing procedures to 
determine eligibility, developing new promotional materials and 
communication plans to reach families with eligible children, 
developing and implementing training for staff and partners, and 
entering into written agreements with the Federal Government and 
partner State agencies. The first-year implementation cost estimate 
of 30% is based on evidence from the most recent Summer EBT 
demonstration project, which found a first-year cost equal to 43% of 
benefits issued, and has been scaled down to 30% account for the 
fact that demonstration projects (a) Served smaller populations, 
with evidence that administrative costs decrease with increases in 
population size; and (b) Included the cost of demonstration project 
evaluation in administrative costs, which will not be the case for 
the Summer EBT program. This was scaled down based on the assumption 
that the cost of demonstration project evaluations accounted for 
approximately one third of total administrative costs.
    By Year 3 (2027), only recurring administrative costs will 
remain, causing administrative costs to level off at 7% of benefits 
issued. Ongoing administrative burdens for State, local, and Tribal 
governments will include submitting an annual Plan for Operations 
and Management, program budget, State Systems Advance Planning 
Document, and other data reporting requirements, as well as 
notification, verification, and enrollment of eligible children and 
maintenance of systems required for benefit issuance. The 
anticipated ongoing administrative cost estimate of 7% was 
determined to be a reasonable midpoint estimate between calculated 
Pandemic EBT administrative costs as a share of benefits issued 
(1.4%) and the proportion of EBT-related SNAP administrative costs 
as a share of benefits issued (11.3%).
    The ratio of Pandemic EBT administrative costs to benefits was 
calculated using State reporting data on total Federal share of 
administrative costs (form FNS-425) and total benefit issuance (form 
FNS-388).\52\ Data were compiled from School Year (SY) 2020-2021 and 
SY 2021-2022, cleaned to remove missing data and outliers, and used 
to generate average administrative costs as a percentage of benefits 
issued (1.4%). Pandemic EBT administrative costs were covered by 
Federal funds at 100%. Because implementation and administrative 
costs were calculated as a percentage of benefits issued in the 1, 
5, and 10-Year cost estimates of the Summer EBT program, it was not 
necessary to apply an additional inflation factor to these costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). National Data Bank 
(NDB). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. 
https://afnazre3ws08.usda.net/NDB8/Home/Home.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EBT-related SNAP costs represented in the ratio of 
administrative costs to benefits issued (11.3%) include 
certification, issuance, Automated Data Processing development 
costs, as well as Automated Data Processing operations costs, and 
exclude costs related to Employment and Training programs or 
workfare programs and fraud control.\53\ For reference, the total 
administrative cost to benefits issued ratio for SNAP was 14.8% in 
FY 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2019). Exploring the Causes of 
State Variation in SNAP Administrative Costs. U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/media/file/SNAP-State-Variation-Admin-Costs-FullReport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to State and Federal costs for implementation and 
ongoing operation of Summer EBT, retailers and households will incur 
costs related to administrative burden. Administrative costs to 
retailers due to verification and reporting requirements are 
estimated at $8.92 million in Year 1 (2024), based on the product of 
a total burden of 479,000 hours, an average hourly rate of $14.01, 
and an overhead factor of 0.33. Administrative costs to households 
who need to complete applications for free and reduced-price 
eligible students and who are not already certified as such through 
school meal programs are estimated at $149 million, based on the 
product of a total burden of 15.4 million hours, an average hourly 
rate of $7.25, and an overhead factor of 0.33.

Impacts

Children and Households Affected

Non-Congregate Meal Service

    By Year 5 (2027) of rule implementation, an estimated 4.25 
million children in 2.36 million households in rural areas will be 
newly participating in summer meal programs during peak as a result 
of the rule (assuming 1.8 participating children per household, 
based on FNS administrative data). At this time, there will be a 
total of 4.88 million children participating in eligible rural 
areas--631,000 of whom were already participating at eligible sites 
before the rule--and a total of 8.40 million children participating 
in SFSP and SSO in both rural and non-rural areas nationwide. It is 
expected that these participation levels will be sustained through 
Year 10 (2032) following implementation of the rule (see Table 8).

Summer EBT

    There are an estimated 25.0 million children in 13.4 million 
households who will receive Summer EBT benefits each year beginning 
in FY 2024 as a result of the rule (based on an average 1.87 
children per household in Summer EBT demonstration projects). The 
number of children receiving benefits is not expected to change over 
the period of analysis (FY 2024-2032), as the overall number of 
children certified as free and reduced-price is not expected to 
change significantly (see Table 10). Participation in Summer EBT 
would hypothetically increase or decrease with a corresponding 
increase or decrease in certification for free and reduced-price 
meals; see section VI. (Uncertainties/Limitations) for further 
discussion of this and other factors that could affect Summer EBT 
participation estimates.

Costs

Benefit and Meal Costs

Non-Congregate Meal Service

    Federal reimbursements for summer meals resulting from increased 
participation in rural areas under the non-congregate meal service 
option are expected to total $7.35 billion over the course of ten 
years (FY 2023-2032). Annual Federal reimbursements attributable to 
the rule are estimated at $1.02 billion by Year 5 (2027), when peak 
participation is reached, and are estimated at $1.14 billion by Year 
10 (2032) due to inflation. See Table 9 for annual estimates of meal 
reimbursement costs attributable to the rule over the ten-year 
period of analysis.

Summer EBT

    The total cost of benefit payments administered through the 
Summer EBT program between FY 2024-2032 is estimated at $28.0 
billion. Annual cost of benefit payments range from $2.8 billion in 
2024 (Year 1) to $3.4 billion in 2032 (Year 9); as participation is 
expected to remain consistent, annual increases in costs are due to 
inflation only. See Table 11 for annual estimates of benefit payment 
costs attributable to the Summer EBT program over the nine-year 
period of analysis.
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P

[[Page 90390]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.056


[[Page 90391]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.057

BILLING CODE 3410-30-C

[[Page 90392]]

Implementation and Administrative Costs

Non-Congregate Meal Service

    Implementation and administrative costs attributable to the non-
congregate meal service provision are expected to total $43.2 
million over the course of ten years (FY 2023-2032). Annual 
administrative costs are largely reflective of the requirement for 
households to provide written consent to participate in the home 
delivery option of non-congregate meal service, while a one-time 
cost to State agencies in Year 1 (2023) accounts for systems changes 
required to accommodate shifting to increased non-congregate meal 
service operation. The administrative burden estimates are discussed 
in more detail in the Paperwork Reduction Act section of this 
interim final rule. See Table 9 for annual estimates of 
administrative costs attributable to the non-congregate provision.

Summer EBT

    Federal and State implementation and administrative costs are 
estimated at a total of $3.6 billion over the nine-year period of 
analysis (FY 2024-2032). In accordance with statute, these costs 
will be shared equally (50%) between States and the Federal 
Government. Implementation and administrative costs are highest 
during the first year of program implementation (2024) due to 
anticipated start-up costs, reaching a steady state by the fifth 
year of program operation. Total State and Federal implementation 
and administrative costs are estimated at $849 million in 2024, $217 
million in 2028, and $238 million in 2032, including inflation.
    See Table 11 for annual estimates of administrative costs 
attributable to the Summer EBT program. As previously discussed, 
additional administrative costs to retailers due to verification and 
reporting requirements are estimated at $8.9 million in the first 
year, while administrative costs to households who need to complete 
Summer EBT applications are estimated at $149 million annually. 
Retailer costs will be primarily limited to the first year of 
program implementation.

[[Page 90393]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.058


[[Page 90394]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.059

BILLING CODE 3910-30-C

[[Page 90395]]

Benefits of the Interim Final Rule

Food Security and Diet Quality

    Though food insecurity among households with children has 
returned to pre-pandemic levels, it remains significant: In 2022, 
about one in six (17.3%) households with children were affected by 
food insecurity.\54\ Broadly speaking, the economic consequences of 
food insecurity include higher average health care costs, lost 
productivity, increased crime rates, and costs associated with lower 
educational outcomes. The sum of these costs has been estimated at 
more than $160 billion each year in the United States.\55\ There is 
evidence to suggest that the introduction of both the non-congregate 
option in rural areas and the Summer EBT Program will help to 
address this challenge. The option to provide non-congregate meal 
service in rural areas may reduce food insecurity among children by 
way of increasing participation in summer meal programs, as previous 
research has shown summer meal programs are likely to be effective 
in reducing food insecurity.\56\ The provision of Summer EBT has 
also been found to generate substantial and statistically 
significant reductions in food insecurity. In Summer EBT 
demonstration projects, a $60 monthly benefit reduced the prevalence 
of food insecurity among children by one-fifth and reduced the most 
severe form of food insecurity (Very Low Food Security, or VLFS) 
among children by one-third.\57\ A smaller $30 benefit was found to 
have similar impact on VLFS. The ability to use Summer EBT 
concurrently with other summer meal programs may prove particularly 
protective against food insecurity in periods of severe economic 
downturn or other social and environmental disruptions that may 
otherwise increase food insecurity rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ Economic Research Service. (2023.) Household Food Security 
in the United States in 2022. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 
Economic Research Service. https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/107703/err-325.pdf?v=9638.3.
    \55\ Cook, J., & Poblacion, A.P. (2015). Estimating the Health-
Related Costs of Food Insecurity and Hunger. Bread for the World 
Institute. https://www.hungerreport.org/costofhunger/fullstudy.html.
    \56\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2021). USDA Summer Meals Study 
Summary. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. 
https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/SummerMealsStudy-2018-SummaryofFindings.pdf.
    \57\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department 
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Summer EBT has also been shown to improve diet quality among 
participating children. Demonstration projects providing a $60 
monthly benefit increased daily fruit and vegetable intake during 
summer months by one-third of a cup per day, whole grains intake by 
one-half ounce equivalent per day, and decreased intake of sugar-
sweetened beverages. A $30 monthly benefit level was also found to 
produce statistically significant improvements in diet quality 
across the same measures.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department 
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Economic Benefits From EBT Retail

    Because the redemption of Summer EBT benefits largely mirrors 
the redemption of traditional SNAP benefits, we expect the economic 
impacts of SNAP benefit redemption will apply to the Summer EBT 
program. USDA research has consistently shown that SNAP spending 
helps to stabilize the economy during economic downturn and 
generates income for individuals and businesses producing, 
transporting, and marketing food purchased by SNAP recipients. The 
impact of each SNAP dollar spent is also multiplied throughout the 
economy; recent estimates indicate that for each $1 in government 
spending, the Gross Domestic Product increases between $0.80 and 
$1.50, depending on current economic conditions.\59\ The multiplier 
effect may be greater when spending is focused on low-income 
households, such as those eligible for SNAP, because these 
households tend to spend more of the money received soon after 
receiving it compared with higher-income households. In this way, 
government spending on programs such as SNAP and Summer EBT generate 
economic benefit not only for program participants, but also for 
individuals who participate in the economies in which program 
dollars are spent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ Economic Research Service. (2019.) The Supplemental 
Nutrition Assistance Program and the Economy: New Estimates of the 
SNAP Multiplier. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research 
Service. https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=93528.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Program Integrity

    The provisions that are described as follows were included to 
address program integrity concerns either identified during COVID P-
EBT operations or mentioned during listening sessions.
    Summer EBT benefits are subject to integrity requirements found 
in the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 established for SNAP. USDA has 
determined that the SNAP regulations implementing sections 12, 14, 
and 15 of the Food and Nutrition Act are also appropriate for Summer 
EBT, and adopting these same requirements is preferable to 
developing different requirements for Summer EBT. This approach is 
also the least burdensome for administering agencies because it does 
not require agencies to develop new implementation approaches.
    The ITO Summer EBT Agencies must also ensure that Summer EBT 
program benefits are used by the eligible household that receives 
such benefits to transact for supplemental foods from Summer EBT-
enrolled vendors that have been approved for participation in the 
WIC Program.
    To ensure effective vendor integrity, the ITO Summer EBT agency 
must set forth a system which ensures:

--Requirements and restrictions on the participation of vendors and 
the transaction of food benefits described in IFR apply to 
activities involving Summer EBT benefits;
--Vendors are subject to the actions and penalties described in the 
IFR for noncompliance or violations involving Summer EBT benefits; 
and
--The standards for determination and disposition of claims 
described at IFR apply to Summer EBT benefits; or
--Set forth an alternate system to ensure effective vendor 
management and vendor integrity.

    In order to ensure program quality and integrity, Summer EBT 
agencies must also have adequate processes to correctly determine 
the eligibility of children for Summer EBT benefits. As with NSLP/
SBP applications, the Summer EBT verification process will align 
with the typical Child Nutrition Program approach to verification, 
which is conducted after the eligibility determination. USDA heard 
from stakeholder engagement and listening sessions with Child 
Nutrition and SNAP State Agencies that implemented P-EBT that up-
front verification (verification of income at the time of 
application) was burdensome for both program administrators and 
households. In contrast, other child nutrition programs like NSLP, 
SBP, and CACFP do not require up-front household income verification 
but rather they require verification on a subset of applications 
after certification. Summer EBT applications (or alternative income 
applications for Summer 2024) will be subject to verification for 
cause, a process through which questionable applications are 
verified on a case-by-case basis.

Integrity Measures for Non-Congregate Feeding

    Based on stakeholder feedback, experience gained under COVID-19 
operations, and summer 2023 implementation, USDA is codifying the 
use of several meal service options specific to non-congregate 
feeding including, but not limited to: multi-day meal issuance; 
parent or guardian meal pick-up; and bulk meal components to meet 
the needs of children in rural areas. While USDA is codifying the 
use of these meal service options, integrity safeguards have been 
added around the permittance and use of these options to ensure 
Program access for eligible children while maintaining Program 
accountability. Through the listening sessions, USDA received varied 
feedback from stakeholders regarding the different meal service 
options when used for non-congregate feeding during the COVID-19 
pandemic. Many of the comments focused on the difficulty of 
balancing Program integrity with Program access. Some stakeholders, 
including a few State agencies, stated that that these options are 
essential for providing non-congregate meals in rural areas and 
praised the benefits to the community, such as the ability to 
provide children meals for the weekend.
    Under this IFR, the meal service options mentioned above may 
only be used by sponsors considered to be in good standing, as 
determined by the State agency. In addition, a State agency may only 
prohibit sponsors from using these meal service options on a case-
by-case basis and without regard to sponsor type if the State agency 
determines that a sponsor does not have the capability to operate or 
oversee non-congregate meal service at their sites.

[[Page 90396]]

Integrity safeguards for multi-day meal issuance and parent or 
guardian meal pick-up includes requiring sponsors to provide 
documented procedures to ensure the proper number of meals are 
distributed to each eligible child and duplicate meals are not 
distributed. Lastly, integrity safeguards have been codified for 
bulk foods to ensure the safety of the children who consume Program 
meals. Sponsors are required to ensure that food items meet the meal 
pattern requirements, foods are clearly identifiable, menus must be 
provided to indicate the food items and portion sizes for all meals 
provided, and only minimal to no preparation is required. In 
addition, any sponsor using bulk foods can only provide a maximum of 
5 days' worth of meals at a time, or less if the State agency 
establishes a shorter calendar period on a case-by-case basis.
    Finally, it is worth noting that all program regulations, 
including existing compliance and oversight requirements of the SFSP 
and NSLP, apply to non-congregate meals served under the Summer 
Nutrition Programs. Under this rule, with a few exceptions, the 
basic monitoring requirements will not change. However, to ensure 
all Program operations, both congregate and non-congregate, are 
properly adhering to Program requirements, USDA is amending the 
regulations to incorporate operational changes to reflect the 
introduction of non-congregate meal service and ensure that such 
meal services are adequately reviewed for compliance.

Uncertainties/Limitations

    There are numerous uncertainties and limitations inherent to 
this analysis. The limitations most likely to affect the analysis 
are noted below, accompanied by sensitivity analyses where relevant. 
Some of these uncertainties and limitations result from the interim 
final rule being developed in a time immediately following the 
COVID-19 public health emergency, which introduced challenges 
collecting timely and accurate data due to other urgent priorities 
and numerous disruptions to trends in Child Nutrition Program 
participation. Both of these challenges present unique complexities 
in the projections of participation and costs.

Program Participation

Non-Congregate Meal Service

    There are several limitations to the calculated increase in 
summer meal program participation following the implementation of 
the non-congregate meal service provision.
    The projected increase in participation is guided by two key 
data points. The first data point is the 96.8% increase in summer 
meal participation that was observed between FY 2019 and FY 2021, 
when waivers provided all SFSP and SSO sites with the ability to 
utilize non-congregate meal service during the COVID-19 pandemic. 
Table 6 demonstrates that peak (July) participation and meals served 
approximately doubled during this time, and then returned to pre-
pandemic levels in FY 2022 following the expiration of the non-
congregate waivers. However, the COVID-19 public health emergency 
ushered in a variety of other waivers and regulatory changes related 
to Child Nutrition Program operations, including Area Eligibility 
waivers,\24\ making it difficult to isolate the impact of the non-
congregate waiver on SFSP and SSO participation. In addition, many 
households were experiencing higher than usual levels of financial 
hardship and food insecurity during this time, which may have 
increased their likeliness to utilize programs providing meals at no 
cost. Our analysis partially addresses these external factors by 
assuming that this 98.6% increase will occur more gradually, over a 
period of three years (FY 2023-2025), as opposed to the period of 
one to two years observed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
    The second data point guiding the analysis is the expected 
maximum participation in SFSP and SSO among eligible rural sites, 
which is estimated at 4.88 million children (see Table 7). As 
described in the Key Assumptions Section of section IV. (Section by 
Section Analysis), the expected maximum participation among eligible 
sites is the product of the total number of rural students eligible 
for non-congregate meal service (7.51 million) and the percentage of 
students who choose to receive school meals via NSLP (65%) when 
meals are available at no charge (e.g., through CEP). Accounting for 
the 631,000 children already participating in school meals at 
eligible rural sites prior to the rule, the expected maximum number 
of new SFSP and SSO participants is 4.25 million, representing a 
substantial 574% increase in the number of children participating in 
eligible areas. Although this increase is significant, conversations 
with State agencies, sponsors, and other stakeholders suggest that 
this increase may be achievable with robust communications efforts 
and technical assistance on behalf of FNS. As such, the analysis 
projects that expected maximum participation in eligible rural sites 
will occur at Year 5 (2027).
    Due to these uncertainties, sensitivity analyses were conducted 
to assess the cost implications of more gradual or more rapid 
participation increases (Tables 12-13). The first scenario assumes 
more rapid increase in participation, in which maximum expected 
participation is achieved by Year 3 (2025), resulting in a 24% 
increase in Federal reimbursements over the course of 10 years as 
compared to the primary estimates. The second scenario assumes a 
more gradual increase in participation in which maximum expected 
participation is achieved by Year 10 (2032), resulting in a 43.8% 
decrease in Federal reimbursements over 10 years as compared to the 
primary estimates. The third scenario assumes a more gradual 
increase in participation in which only half of maximum expected 
participation is achieved by Year 10 (2032), resulting in a 70.8% 
decrease in Federal reimbursements over 10 years. Note that 
participation increases are not linear, as each scenario assumes 
that early increases in participation are more gradual and achieve 
the 96.8% participation increase observed during the COVID-19 
pandemic by either Year 1 (2023), Year 3 (2025), or Year 5 (2027), 
depending on the scenario.

Summer EBT

    As previously described, participant take-up (i.e., the share of 
eligible children who are enrolled and participate in the Summer EBT 
program) is estimated at 83% based on results from Summer EBT 
demonstration studies.
    The Summer EBT demonstration studies completed by FNS show that 
the average participant take-up rate via passive enrollment is 93.5% 
(ranging from 90% to 97% in demonstration projects) and the average 
participant take-up rate via active enrollment is 40% (ranging from 
23% to 57%).\11\ Combining the passive enrollment take-up rate 
(93.5% for the passive enrollment children) and the active 
enrollment take-up rate (40% for the active enrollment children) 
results in a weighted average participant take-up of 83%. However, 
it is possible that the participant take-up rate will be lower than 
expected, as a growing number of States are offering school meals to 
all students at no cost and households may be less incentivized to 
submit applications for free and reduced-price meals, thereby 
lowering the percentage of students that would be enrolled in Summer 
EBT via active enrollment. For this reason, a sensitivity analysis 
was conducted assuming participant take-up was at the low end of the 
ranges provided in the Summer EBT Demonstration Study, resulting in 
a participant take-up of 23% via active enrollment and 90% via 
passive enrollment for an overall participant take-up rate of 77% in 
Year 1 (2024). This would result in an 2.1% decrease in Summer EBT 
benefit costs over the period of analysis (2024-2032) compared to 
the primary estimates (see Tables 13-14).
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P

[[Page 90397]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.060


[[Page 90398]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.061


[[Page 90399]]



State Participation in Program

Summer EBT

    As previously noted, it is the expectation of FNS that all 
States will implement Summer EBT in the first year of the program 
(2024) and that participation is sustained at this level through the 
lifespan of this analysis (2032). However, there may be some States 
that are prevented from fully implementing the program in the 
initial year(s); for example, several States that plan to 
participate have noted that there may be challenges implementing the 
program beginning in 2024 due to the timing of budget cycles. For 
this reason, a sensitivity analysis has been conducted to assess the 
impact of delayed State take-up. A lagging State take-up rate 
starting at 75% in Year 1 (2024) and reaching 100% by Year 5 (2028) 
with annual linear increases would result in a 7.1% decrease in 
Summer EBT benefit costs over the nine-year period of analysis 
(2024-2032) (see Tables 14-15).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.062


[[Page 90400]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.063

BILLING CODE 3410-30-C

Implementation and Administrative Costs

Summer EBT

    Because Summer EBT is a new program, there is some uncertainty 
inherent to the administrative costs the program will incur, 
particularly on behalf of State and Federal governments and Tribal 
Organizations. As previously described, the analysis assumes that 
implementation costs will equal 30% of benefits issued in year 1 of 
operation (2024), decreasing to a constant 7% of benefits issued by 
year 5 of operation (2028). However, because these estimates 
represent reasonable averages or midpoints among a range of 
potential values, the true cost may be higher or lower; therefore, a 
sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the impact of potential 
variation in implementation and administrative costs (see Table 16). 
The results show that an initial start-up cost equal to 40% of 
benefits issued, decreasing to a constant 10% by 2028, would 
increase administrative costs by 29.7% over nine years compared to 
the primary estimate, while an initial start-up cost equal to 20% of

[[Page 90401]]

benefits issued, decreasing to a constant 5% by 2028 would decrease 
administrative costs by 31.4% over nine years.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.064

Alternative(s)

    Throughout the development of the interim final rule, various 
regulatory options were weighed and discussed with the goal of 
identifying provisions that would optimize outcomes for all 
stakeholders. Alternatives to key provisions of the interim final 
rule are described below, along with the rationale favoring the 
provisions selected.

Coordinated Services Plan

    Each State agency will need to establish a Coordinated Services 
Plan (CSP), to coordinate the statewide availability of services 
offered through the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) and the 
Summer EBT Program (and the National School Lunch Program Seamless 
Summer Program, if appropriate). Initial plans will need to be 
submitted to FNS no later than January 1, 2025. They will need to be 
submitted annually when significant updates are made--otherwise, at 
least every three years. States will need to consult with other 
agencies (as applicable) on their plans and must share them publicly 
on a website.
    The alternative would have been to include the CSP as part of a 
combined Management and Administration Plan (MAP) for SFSP and 
Summer-EBT. Due to the programs being on different planning 
schedules for summer operations and considering how different State 
agencies may administer the programs, a combined MAP would have 
required the same or greater time and effort as required for the 
CSP, despite condensing the number of required documents. States 
administering the SFSP will continue to submit a MAP, and a separate 
Plan for Operations and Management (POM) will be required for S-EBT. 
The CSP will give a general overview of statewide programming while 
keeping each program's operational details to the MAP/POM.

Non-Congregate Meal Service

    Throughout the development of the non-congregate provisions for 
this interim final rule, various regulatory options were weighed and 
discussed with the goal of identifying provisions that would 
optimize outcomes for all stakeholders. Two such provisions were the 
regulatory definition of rural and the meal service options 
available for non-congregate feeding. The alternatives to these key 
provisions are discussed below.
    The definition of ``rural'' under the Program was expanded to 
include other Federal classification schemes to create an approach 
that more expansively covers rural population and territory to the 
satisfaction of stakeholders while upholding established measures of 
rural. The alternative would have been to maintain the current 
regulatory definition of rural, which is based solely on 
metropolitan and non-metropolitan classification. This 
classification scheme presents identification challenges for the 
purposes of the Program as metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas 
are defined at the county level, and thus, the different levels of 
rurality within counties are not accurately delineated.
    The current regulatory definition does provide discretion to 
designate any ``pocket'' within a Metropolitan Statistical Area that 
is determined to be geographically isolated from urban areas with 
FNS Regional Office (FNSRO) approval. However, this has led to 
inconsistent application of rural pockets across the States and 
resulted in increased burden on the State agencies to identify and 
receive approval for these designations. Incorporating additional 
Federal classification schemes into the regulatory definition to 
define what rural is under the Program will allow State agencies to 
more effectively identify and target rural populations and 
territories for outreach and non-congregate provision purposes and 
will ease administrative burden and streamline the site 
identification and approval process for State agencies and Program 
operators. Because using the current regulatory definition may have 
increased administrative burden, it may have also been associated 
with marginal increases in administrative costs.
    Under this interim final rule, USDA will allow operators to use 
meal service options specific to non-congregate feeding including, 
but not limited to: multi-day meal issuance; parent or guardian meal 
pick-up; and bulk meal components to meet the needs of children in 
rural areas. Based on stakeholder feedback, experience gained under 
COVID-19 operations, and summer 2023 implementation, the use of 
these flexibilities is imperative to children in rural communities 
accessing meals during the summer months when school is out of 
session. The alternative to this provision would have been to 
require sites to distribute meals to children in-person, in limited 
quantities, for each meal service during the approved meal service 
times, similar to a congregate meal service. Such restrictions 
defeat the purpose and efficacy of non-congregate service in rural 
communities which may benefit from the use of these options where 
children would otherwise have to travel long distances to receive a 
meal, for instance. While the USDA is codifying these meal service 
options, integrity safeguards have been included around the use of 
these options to ensure Program access for eligible children while 
maintaining Program accountability. These integrity safeguards are 
discussed under the Program Integrity section of this Regulatory 
Impact Analysis.

Summer EBT

Structure of ITO Food Benefits

    ITO Summer EBT agencies may choose the benefit delivery model 
they prefer: a cash-value benefit (CVB) model, a food package model, 
a combination of the two, or an alternate model. The alternative 
would have been to limit ITO Summer EBT agencies to only the food 
benefit models typically available to them through the WIC program. 
It is important to allow ITO choice of benefit delivery model so 
they may best serve their populations. Participants in the Summer 
EBT demonstration projects indicated they appreciated the greater 
flexibility and choice in the food package items and quantities.\60\ 
The alternative would have likely been cost-neutral relative to the 
interim final rule provision, as there are not significant 
differences between the value of cash-value

[[Page 90402]]

Summer EBT benefits and the value of a food package.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department 
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ITO Enrollment Procedures

    ITO Summer EBT agencies receive priority consideration to serve 
eligible children within their service areas, meaning that children 
from the ITO service area who can be enrolled through streamlined 
certification will automatically be enrolled in the ITO-administered 
Summer EBT program. If the eligible child wants to participate in 
the State-administered program, they must notify the ITO and the 
State and request this change. The alternative options would be to 
require all participants in ITO service areas to participate in the 
ITO-administered program, or to automatically enroll all children in 
the State Summer EBT Program. Households may prefer ITO or State-
administered programs for a variety of reasons. Automatically 
enrolling children in ITO-service areas in the ITO program while 
allowing them to opt into the State-administered program permits 
households to decide how and from whom they want to receive benefits 
based on their individual circumstances. The selection of this 
alternative would not have impacted overall program costs, as the 
number of children served by the program would remain unchanged.

Structure of the Program

    FNS will provide States with the flexibility to name which 
agency will have the written agreement with FNS (i.e., the 
coordinating Summer EBT agency) and to decide how Summer EBT 
responsibilities are delegated across their respective State and 
local agencies. The alternative option is for FNS to name which 
agency within a State will be responsible for the overall 
administration of the Summer EBT program, as well as the roles and 
responsibilities of each agency within a State. Allowing States 
maximum flexibility to delegate Summer EBT program responsibilities 
will ease program administration and facilitate the Federal grant 
process. This is expected to have little impact on overall program 
costs.

Expungement

    FNS will require Summer EBT benefits to become unavailable to 
households 4 months after issuance. This approach will provide 
households a reasonable amount of time after the summer operational 
period to finish spending their benefits. With timely issuance, 
benefits will exist for the summer period and be expunged soon 
thereafter, consistent with congressional intent. The alternative 
model is ``expungement from last use,'' meaning Summer EBT benefits 
could exist well into the school year. This model would run counter 
to the congressional intent of the program: to provide food benefits 
during the summer to help reduce food insecurity while kids are out 
of school. The current requirement may result in slightly lower 
program costs than the alternative, due to the fact that unused 
benefits will be expunged in a more timely fashion.

Verification for Cause

    FNS will allow States or LEAs to conduct verification for cause 
on all Summer EBT applications in FY2024. The guidance instituted 
for verification for cause means that States or LEAs will only need 
to target applications that they think present a higher than normal 
risk of error. The alternative option is requiring that States or 
LEAs verify three percent of all Summer EBT applications beginning 
in FY 2024. However, FNS heard from stakeholder engagement and 
listening sessions with Child Nutrition and SNAP State agencies that 
this requirement would place undue burden on Summer EBT agencies in 
the first year of program administration. FNS will require that 
three percent of all Summer EBT applications be verified beginning 
in FY 2025, in alignment with other school meal programs.

Required Statewide Database

    FNS will require that States and ITOs administering the Summer 
EBT program implement a statewide database with school meal 
enrollment data by FY 2025. Requiring a statewide database will 
facilitate the data sharing and enrollment processes, detect and 
prevent duplicate benefit issuance, and increase data integrity 
across the Summer EBT program. One grantee under the Summer EBT 
demonstrations established a centralized database that contained 
households that were eligible for free and reduced price meals. This 
system annually compiled all household information from multiple 
sources for households that were already eligible for free and 
reduced-price meals into one file to upload to its benefit issuance 
system, thereby efficiently automating the benefit issuance process. 
Requiring a statewide database will also reduce burden on LEAs, 
although the burden will shift to State agencies. Delaying this 
requirement until FY 2025 will allow Summer EBT agencies time to 
acquire necessary funding and for database development.

Benefit Funds Process

    In FY 2024, FNS will disburse benefit funds through the Federal 
grant process. The alternative option is to disburse Summer EBT 
benefit funds through the Account Management Agent (AMA) process. 
FNS decided on the grant process to give States more flexibility and 
to reduce the cost and administrative burden related to modifying 
the AMA process to support a separate, permanent program beginning 
in 2024. Additionally, Summer EBT benefits must be tracked 
separately from SNAP benefits, or other benefit types, but are 
subject to the same oversight, restrictions, and requirements as 
SNAP benefits. The Federal grant funding and issuance model supports 
these requirements.

[FR Doc. 2023-28488 Filed 12-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P