8218 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

20 CFR Part 641 

[Docket No. ETA–2022–0002] 

RIN 1205–AC04 

Senior Community Service 

Employment Program Conforming 

Changes to the Supporting Older 

Americans Act of 2020—Updated 

Guidance on Priority of Service, 

Durational Limits and State Plan 

Submissions 

AGENCY: Employment and Training 

Administration, Labor. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; technical 

amendments. 

SUMMARY: The Employment and 

Training Administration (ETA) of the 

Department of Labor (Department) is 

issuing this proposed rule amending the 

Senior Community Service Employment 

Program (SCSEP) regulations to conform 

with changes in the Supporting Older 

Americans Act of 2020 regarding 

individuals who have been incarcerated 

within the last 5 years. Consistent with 

the Act, this proposed rule adds this 

category of individuals to the priority 

groups; adds this category of individuals 

to the list of categories grantees may 

choose from to make eligible for 

increased periods of participation; 

includes people in this category within 

the definition of the term ‘‘individuals 

with barriers to employment’’; and 

requires that grantees identify and 

report on the relative distribution of 

these individuals in the State Plan. 

DATES: Comments to this proposed rule 

must be submitted by March 16, 2022. 

All submissions must be made by the 

close of the comment period. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

electronically identified by Regulatory 

Identification Number (RIN) 1205–AC04 

by the following method: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions on the website for 

submitting comments. 

Instructions: Include the agency’s 

name and docket number ETA–2022– 

0002 in your comments. All comments 

received will become a matter of public 

record and will be posted without 

change to https://www.regulations.gov. 

Please do not include any personally 

identifiable or confidential business 

information that you do not want 

publicly disclosed. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Rietzke, Chief, Division of 

National Programs, Tools and Technical 

Assistance, Office of Workforce 

Investment, at 202–693–3980. (This is 

not a toll-free number.) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Preamble Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Consideration of Comments 

III. Publication as a Direct Final Rule 

IV. Section-by-Section Discussion of Changes 

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 

I. Background 

The SCSEP, authorized by title V of 

the Older Americans Act of 1965 (OAA) 

and most recently reauthorized in 2020, 

is the only federally sponsored 

employment and training program 

targeted specifically to low-income, 

older individuals who want to enter or 

reenter the workforce. The program 

provides subsidized work experience 

training for low-income persons 55 

years or older who are unemployed and 

have poor employment prospects. The 

dual goals of the program are to promote 

useful community service employment 

activities and to move SCSEP 

participants into unsubsidized 

employment so that they can achieve 

economic self-sufficiency. 

In the Supporting Older Americans 

Act of 2020, Public Law 116–131 (the 

Act), Congress amended title V of the 

OAA to make certain changes to the 

SCSEP that would take effect 1 year 

from the March 25, 2020, enactment of 

the Act, i.e., March 25, 2021. First, the 

Act makes an individual who ‘‘has been 

incarcerated within the last 5 years or is 

under supervision following release 

from prison or jail within the last 5 

years’’ eligible for priority of service 

over those individuals who meet only 

the basic SCSEP eligibility criteria 

related to age, income, and employment. 

Public Law 116–131, sec. 

401(a)(3)(B)(iii); 42 U.S.C. 

3056p(b)(2)(H). Second, the Act adds 

individuals who ‘‘have been 

incarcerated within the last 5 years or 

are under supervision following release 

from prison or jail within the last 5 

years,’’ to the list of categories for which 

the Department is required to authorize 

any SCSEP grantee to provide an 

increased period of participation if the 

relevant SCSEP grantee has made such 

a request. Public Law 116–131, sec. 

401(a)(3)(A)(iii); 42 U.S.C. 

3056p(a)(3)(B)(ii)(VI). Third, the Act 

revises the definition of ‘‘individuals 

with barriers to employment’’ to include 

‘‘eligible individuals who have been 

incarcerated or are under supervision 

following release from prison or jail.’’ 

Public Law 116–131, sec. 401(a)(2); 42 

U.S.C. 3056l(e)(1). Finally, the Act 

requires State Plans to identify and 

address the relative distribution of 

‘‘eligible individuals who have been 

incarcerated within the last 5 years or 

are under supervision following release 

from prison or jail within the last 5 

years.’’ Public Law 116–131, sec. 

401(a)(1)(C); 42 U.S.C. 3056a(a)(4)(C)(v). 

In this proposed rule, the Department 

is proposing to incorporate the statutory 

changes described above into the SCSEP 

program regulations at 20 CFR part 641. 

II. Consideration of Comments 

The Department requests comment on 

all issues related to this proposed rule. 

As discussed more fully below, this 

proposed rule is the companion 

document to a direct final rule (DFR) 

published in the ‘‘Rules’’ section of this 

issue of the Federal Register. If the 

Department receives no significant 

adverse comment on the proposal or 

DFR, the Department will publish a 

Federal Register document confirming 

the effective date of the DFR and 

withdrawing this companion proposed 

rule. Such confirmation may include 

minor stylistic or technical changes to 

the DFR. For the purpose of judicial 

review, the Department views the date 

of confirmation of the effective date of 

the DFR as the date of promulgation. If, 

however, Department receives a 

significant adverse comment on the DFR 

or proposal, the Agency will publish a 

timely withdrawal of the DFR and 

proceed with this proposed rule, which 

addresses the same revisions to the 

SCSEP program. 

III. Publication as a Direct Final Rule 

As noted above, in addition to 

publishing this proposed rule, the 

Department is concurrently publishing a 

companion DFR in the Federal Register. 

In direct final rulemaking, an agency 

publishes a DFR in the Federal Register, 

with a statement that the rule will go 

into effect unless the agency receives 

significant adverse comment within a 

specified period. The agency may 

publish an identical concurrent 

proposed rule. If the agency receives no 

significant adverse comment in 

response to the DFR, the rule goes into 

effect. The Department plans to confirm 

the effective date of a DFR through a 

separate Federal Register document. If 

the Agency receives a significant 

adverse comment, the Agency will 

withdraw the DFR and treat such 

comment as a response to the proposed 

rule. An Agency typically uses direct 

final rulemaking when an agency 

anticipates that a rule will not be 

controversial. 

The comment period for this 

proposed rule runs concurrently with 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 8219 

that of the DFR. The Department will 

treat comments received on the 

proposed rule as comments also 

regarding the companion DFR. 

Similarly, the Department will consider 

comments submitted to the companion 

DFR as comments to the proposed rule. 

Therefore, if the Department receives a 

significant adverse comment on either 

the DFR or this proposed rule, it will 

withdraw the companion DFR and 

proceed with the proposed rule. In the 

event the Department withdraws the 

DFR because of significant adverse 

comment, the Department will consider 

all timely comments received in 

response to the DFR when it continues 

with the proposed rule. After 

considering all comments to the DFR 

and the proposed rule, the Department 

will decide whether to publish a new 

final rule. 

IV. Section-by-Section Discussion of 

Proposed Changes 

The Department is proposing to make 

the following changes to implement the 

provisions of the Act. First, the 

Department is proposing to revise 

§ 641.140 to define formerly 

incarcerated individuals as individuals 

who ‘‘were incarcerated at any point 

within the last 5 years,’’ or ‘‘were under 

supervision at any point within the last 

5 years, following release from prison or 

jail.’’ The definition also specifies that 

the referenced 5-year period means the 

5 years preceding the date of first 

determination of program eligibility, as 

described in § 641.505, for initial 

enrollment into the program. The 

current regulation does not include a 

definition of formerly incarcerated 

individuals, but the Department is 

proposing to define the term in this 

proposed rule based upon language 

provided in the Act, which makes an 

individual who ‘‘has been incarcerated 

within the last 5 years or is under 

supervision following release from 

prison or jail within the last 5 years’’ 

eligible for priority enrollment. Public 

Law 116–131, sec. 401(a)(3)(B)(iii); 42 

U.S.C. 3056p(b)(2)(H). The definition 

included in this proposed rule also 

contains an explanation of the meaning 

of the 5-year period specified in the Act 

in order to clarify the meaning of the 

phrase ‘‘within the last 5 years.’’ The 

Act is silent about how to calculate the 

5-year period. The Department has 

determined that connecting this date to 

the individual’s possible participation 

in the SCSEP program aligns with the 

intent of the amendments and that using 

the ‘‘date of first determination of 

program eligibility’’ as described in 

§ 641.505 provides a readily available 

date for grantees to reference when 

determining individuals’ eligibility for 

the program. 

The Department is also proposing to 

revise § 641.140 to include ‘‘formerly 

incarcerated individuals’’ in the 

definition of ‘‘most-in-need.’’ The 

existing definition of most-in-need is 

made up of all the categories of 

individuals for whom the grantees may 

request be made eligible for increased 

periods of participation (the list is at 42 

U.S.C. 3056p(a)(3)(B)(ii)) and the 

categories of individuals who receive 

priority enrollment (the list in 42 U.S.C. 

3056p(b)(2)). Under sec. 401(a)(3) of the 

Act, individuals eligible for increased 

periods of participation now include 

individuals who ‘‘have been 

incarcerated within the last 5 years or 

are under supervision following release 

from prison or jail within the last 5 

years,’’ and the priority of service list 

now includes individuals who ‘‘ha[ve] 

been incarcerated within the last 5 years 

or [are] under supervision following 

release from prison or jail within the 

last 5 years.’’ Consistent with the Act’s 

addition of ‘‘formerly incarcerated 

individuals’’ to these two lists, the 

Department is adding ‘‘are formerly 

incarcerated as defined in this section’’ 

to the § 641.140 definition of ‘‘most-inneed.’’ For purposes of clarity, the 

Department also has proposed 

restructuring the definition of ‘‘most-inneed’’ to present the list of most-in-need 

individuals as a numbered list. 

Similarly, based on amendments 

made in the Act, the Department is 

proposing to revise § 641.325(b) to 

comply with the Act’s requirement that 

the State Plan identify and address the 

relative distribution of ‘‘eligible 

individuals who have been incarcerated 

within the last 5 years or are under 

supervision following release from 

prison or jail within the last 5 years.’’ 

Public Law 116–131, sec. 401(a)(1)(C); 

42 U.S.C. 3056a(a)(4)(C)(v). Currently, 

§ 641.325(b) lists information that must 

be included in the State Plan, including 

the relative distribution of certain 

individuals eligible for the program. 

Pursuant to the Act’s requirement, see 

42 U.S.C. 3056a(a)(4)(C)(v), the 

Department is proposing to revise 

§ 641.325(b) to add ‘‘[e]ligible 

individuals who are formerly 

incarcerated individuals as defined in 

§ 641.140’’ to the list of eligible 

individuals on whom the State Plan 

must provide information regarding 

relative distribution. 

Additionally, the Department is 

proposing to revise §§ 641.420 and 

641.520 to incorporate the Act’s 

requirement that eligible individuals 

who ‘‘[have] been incarcerated within 

the last 5 years or [are] under 

supervision following release from 

prison or jail within the last 5 years’’ 

receive priority enrollment. Public Law 

116–131, sec. 401(a)(3)(B)(iii); 42 U.S.C. 

3056p(b)(2)(H). Paragraphs (a)(1) 

through (8) of § 641.520 list the 

characteristics that grantees and subrecipients must consider when 

determining whether to provide eligible 

individuals with priority. Pursuant to 

the Act, see 42 U.S.C. 3056p(b)(2)(H), 

the Department is proposing to revise 

this list to include new paragraph (a)(9), 

which provides priority to individuals 

who are formerly incarcerated 

individuals, as defined in § 641.140. 

Accordingly, the Department is also 

proposing to make a minor technical 

change to § 641.420(e) to update the 

reference to § 641.520(a) to account for 

the addition of paragraph (a)(9) in 

§ 641.520. 

The Department is also proposing to 

revise §§ 641.570 and 641.710 to 

integrate the Act’s requirement that the 

Secretary authorize a grantee to increase 

the period of participation for 

individuals who ‘‘have been 

incarcerated within the last 5 years or 

are under supervision following release 

from prison or jail within the last 5 

years.’’ Public Law 116–131, sec. 

401(a)(3)(A)(iii); 42 U.S.C. 

3056p(a)(3)(B)(ii)(VI). Existing SCSEP 

regulations at § 641.570(b) list the 

categories of individuals for whom the 

Department is proposing to provide 

increased periods of participation if 

requested by the grantee. Pursuant to 

the Act, the Department is proposing to 

add new paragraph (b)(6), which states 

that individuals who are formerly 

incarcerated individuals, as defined in 

§ 641.140 are, upon a grantee’s request, 

eligible for an extended period of 

individual participation. Additionally, 

existing SCSEP regulations at § 641.710 

define core performance measures, 

including ‘‘service to the [m]ost-inneed’’ (§ 641.710(g)). Consistent with 

the proposed change to the most-inneed definition at § 641.140, discussed 

above, the Department proposing adding 

a new paragraph at § 641.710(g)(14) to 

include individuals who ‘‘[a]re formerly 

incarcerated individuals as defined in 

§ 641.140’’ to the list of individuals 

characterized as most-in-need. See 

Public Law 116–131, sec. 401(a)(3); 42 

U.S.C. 3056p(a)(3)(B)(ii)(IV), (b)(2)(H). 

Finally, sec. 401(a)(2) of the Act 

revises the definition of ‘‘individuals 

with barriers to employment’’ in the 

OAA to include ‘‘eligible individuals 

who have been incarcerated or are 

under supervision following release 

from prison or jail.’’ Public Law 116– 

131, sec. 401(a)(2); 42 U.S.C. 3056l(e)(1). 

This section of the OAA requires certain 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
8220 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

national SCSEP grantees to give special 

consideration to selecting subgrantee 

organizations with demonstrated 

expertise in serving individuals with 

barriers to employment. Paragraph (d) of 

§ 641.881(d) is the corresponding 

regulatory provision to implement this 

section of the OAA, stating that for 

purposes of this section, the term 

‘‘individuals with barriers to 

employment’’ includes ‘‘minority 

individuals, Indian individuals, 

individuals with greatest economic 

need, and most-in-need individuals.’’ 

The Department notes that because the 

existing regulatory text in § 641.881(d) 

references ‘‘most-in-need individuals,’’ 

the regulatory text does not require 

change to align with the Act. The 

changes explained above that propose 

adding formerly incarcerated 

individuals to the most-in-need 

definition at § 641.140 and to the list of 

most-in-need individuals at § 641.710(g) 

have the effect of including formerly 

incarcerated individuals in the reference 

to most-in-need individuals in the 

existing definition of barriers to 

employment at § 641.881(d)(2). 

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, 

Executive Order 13272, Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 

5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., requires the 

Department to evaluate the economic 

impact of this rule with regard to small 

entities. The RFA defines small entities 

to include small businesses, small 

organizations including not-for-profit 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. The Department must 

determine whether the proposed rule 

imposes a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of such small 

entities. 

There are 77 SCSEP grantees; 50 of 

these are States and are not small 

entities as defined by the RFA. Six 

grantees are governmental jurisdictions 

other than States (four grantees are 

territories, such as Guam; one grantee is 

Washington, DC; and another grantee is 

Puerto Rico). Governmental 

jurisdictions must have a population of 

less than 50,000 to qualify as a small 

entity for RFA purposes and the 

population of these 6 SCSEP grantees 

each exceeds 50,000. The remaining 21 

grantees are non-profit organizations, 

which includes some large, national 

non-profit organizations. 

The Department has determined that 

this proposed rule will impose a 

negligible additional burden on small 

entities. SCSEP grantees already review 

their policies on a regular basis to align 

with guidance and the activities related 

to this proposed rule will only add one 

more item to consider during these 

activities. SCSEP grantees also already 

determine eligibility on a regular basis 

and the additional population category 

is only an additional factor to consider. 

Whatever negligible costs that the new 

regulation requires of SCSEP grantees is 

covered by SCSEP administrative costs 

and programmatic activity costs 

funding. 

The Department certifies that this 

proposed rule does not impose a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, 

Office of Management and Budget’s 

(OMB’s) Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs determines whether a 

regulatory action is significant and, 

therefore, subject to the requirements of 

the Executive order and review by OMB. 

58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). 

Section 3(f) of E.O. 12866 defines a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as an 

action that is likely to result in a rule 

that: (1) Has an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more, or 

adversely affects in a material way a 

sector of the economy, productivity, 

competition, jobs, the environment, 

public health or safety, or State, local or 

tribal governments or communities (also 

referred to as economically significant); 

(2) creates serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interferes with an action 

taken or planned by another agency; (3) 

materially alters the budgetary impacts 

of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan 

programs, or the rights and obligations 

of recipients thereof; or (4) raises novel 

legal or policy issues arising out of legal 

mandates, the President’s priorities, or 

the principles set forth in the E.O. Id. 

OMB has determined that this 

rulemaking is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under sec. 3(f) of E.O. 

12866. 

E.O. 13563 directs agencies to propose 

or adopt a regulation only upon a 

reasoned determination that its benefits 

justify its costs; it is tailored to impose 

the least burden on society, consistent 

with achieving the regulatory objectives; 

and in choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, the agency has 

selected those approaches that 

maximize net benefits. E.O. 13563 

recognizes that some benefits are 

difficult to quantify and provides that, 

where appropriate and permitted by 

law, agencies may consider and discuss 

qualitatively values that are difficult or 

impossible to quantify, including 

equity, human dignity, fairness, and 

distributive impacts. 

OMB waived review of this 

rulemaking because it is not a 

significant regulatory action. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed rule is not subject to 

the requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA 95) (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) because it does not 

contain a collection of information as 

defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3). The 

Department previously submitted to 

OMB revision requests to the three 

information collections affected by the 

statute in this proposed rule, which 

were subsequently approved by OMB. 

See Information Collection Request 

(ICR) Reference Numbers 202112–1205– 

003 (OMB Control Number 1205–0521), 

202108–1205–007 (OMB Control 

Number 1205–0040), and 202103–1205– 

001 (OMB Control Number 1205–0448). 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

For purposes of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, this 

proposed rule does not include any 

Federal mandate that may result in 

increased expenditures by State, local, 

and tribal governments in the aggregate 

of more than $100 million, or increased 

expenditures by the private sector of 

more than $100 million. 

Executive Order 13132 

The Department has reviewed this 

proposed rule in accordance with E.O. 

13132 regarding federalism and has 

determined that it does not have 

‘‘federalism implications.’’ The rule 

does not ‘‘have substantial direct effects 

on the States, on the relationship 

between the [N]ational [G]overnment 

and the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government.’’ This 

proposed rule updates, defines, and 

implements eligibility requirements, 

waiver factors, and performance 

measures for the SCSEP. While States 

are SCSEP grantees, this proposed rule 

merely makes minor changes to 

currently ongoing data collection 

processes. Requiring State grantees to 

implement these changes does not 

constitute a ‘‘substantial direct effect’’ 

on the States, nor will it alter the 

relationship or responsibilities between 

the Federal and State governments. 

Privacy Act 

The Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 

552a, provides safeguards to individuals 

concerning their personal information 

that the Government collects. The 

Privacy Act requires certain actions by 

an agency that collects information on 

individuals when that information 

contains personally identifiable 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 8221 

information, such as Social Security 

numbers (SSNs) or names. Because 

SCSEP participant records are 

maintained by SSN, the Privacy Act 

applies here. 

A key concern is for the protection of 

participant SSNs. Grantees must collect 

the SSN in order to pay participants 

properly for their community service 

work in host agencies. When grantees 

send participant files to the Department 

for aggregation, the transmittal is 

protected by secure encryption. When 

participant files are retrieved within the 

internet-based SCSEP data management 

system, only the last four digits of the 

SSN are displayed. Any information 

that is shared or made public is 

aggregated by grantee and does not 

reveal personal information on specific 

individuals. 

The Department works diligently to 

ensure the highest level of security 

whenever personally identifiable 

information is stored or transmitted. All 

contractors that have access to 

individually identifying information are 

required to provide assurances that they 

will respect and protect the 

confidentiality of the data. The 

Department’s Office the Chief 

Information Officer has been an active 

participant in the development and 

approval of data security measures. 

In addition to the above, the 

Department provides a Privacy Act 

Statement to grantees for distribution to 

all participants. The Department 

advised grantees of the requirement in 

Training and Employment Guidance 

Letter No. 39–11 (June 28, 2012). 

Participants receive this information 

when they meet with a caseworker or 

intake counselor. When the Department 

monitors the programs, implementation 

of this term is included in the reviews. 

Amended Regulatory Text 

List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 641 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Aged, Employment, Equal 

employment opportunity, Government 

contracts, Grant programs—labor, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Department proposes to 

amend 20 CFR part 641 as follows: 

PART 641—PROVISIONS GOVERNING 

THE SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICE 

EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 641 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3056–3056p. 

Subpart A—Purpose and Definitions 

■ 2. Amend § 641.140 by adding the 

definition of Formerly incarcerated 

individuals in alphabetical order and 

revising the definition of Most-in-need 

to read as follows: 

§ 641.140 What definitions apply to this 

part? 

* * * * * 

Formerly incarcerated individuals 

means: 

(1) Individuals who were incarcerated 

at any point within the last 5 years; or 

(2) Individuals who were under 

supervision at any point within the last 

5 years, following release from prison or 

jail. 

(3) The 5-year period specified in this 

definition refers to the 5 years preceding 

the date of first determination of 

program eligibility, as described in 

§ 641.505, for initial enrollment into the 

program. 

* * * * * 

Most-in-need means participants with 

one or more of the following 

characteristics (OAA sec. 513(b)(1)(F)): 

(1) Have a severe disability; 

(2) Are frail; 

(3) Are age 75 or older; 

(4) Are age-eligible but not receiving 

benefits under title II of the Social 

Security Act; 

(5) Reside in an area with persistent 

unemployment and have severely 

limited employment prospects; 

(6) Have limited English proficiency; 

(7) Have low literacy skills; 

(8) Have a disability; 

(9) Reside in a rural area; 

(10) Are veterans; 

(11) Have low employment prospects; 

(12) Have failed to find employment 

after using services provided under title 

I of the Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act; 

(13) Are homeless or at risk for 

homelessness; or 

(14) Are ‘‘formerly incarcerated’’ as 

defined in this section. 

* * * * * 

Subpart C—The State Plan 

■ 3. Amend § 641.325 by revising 

paragraphs (b)(4) and (5) and adding 

paragraph (b)(6) to read as follows: 

§ 641.325 What information must be 

provided in the State Plan? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(4) Eligible individuals who are 

limited English proficient; 

(5) Eligible individuals who have the 

greatest social need; and 

(6) Eligible individuals who are 

formerly incarcerated individuals as 

defined in § 641.140; 

* * * * * 

Subpart D—Grant Application and 

Responsibility Review Requirements 

for State and National SCSEP Grants 

■ 4. Amend § 641.420 by revising 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 641.420 What are the eligibility criteria 

that each applicant must meet? 

* * * * * 

(e) An ability to move participants 

with multiple barriers to employment, 

including individuals described in 

§ 641.570(b) or § 641.520(a)(2) through 

(9), into unsubsidized employment; 

* * * * * 

Subpart E—Services to Participants 

■ 5. Amend § 641.520 by revising the 

section heading and paragraphs (a)(7) 

and (8) and adding paragraph (a)(9) to 

read as follows: 

§ 641.520 Are there any priorities that 

grantees and sub-recipients must use in 

selecting eligible individuals for 

participation in the Senior Community 

Service Employment Program? 

(a) * * * 

(7) Have failed to find employment 

after using services provided through 

the one-stop delivery system; 

(8) Are homeless or are at risk for 

homelessness; or 

(9) Are formerly incarcerated 

individuals as defined in § 641.140. 

(OAA sec. 518(b)) 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Amend § 641.570 by revising 

paragraphs (b)(4) and (5) and adding 

paragraph (b)(6) to read as follows: 

§ 641.570 Is there a time limit for 

participation in the program? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(4) Live in an area with persistent 

unemployment and are individuals with 

severely limited employment prospects; 

(5) Have limited English proficiency 

or low literacy skills; or 

(6) Are formerly incarcerated 

individuals as defined in § 641.140. 

* * * * * 

Subpart G—Performance 

Accountability 

■ 7. Amend § 641.710 by revising 

paragraphs (g)(12) and (13) and adding 

paragraph (g)(14) to read as follows: 

§ 641.710 How are the performance 

measures defined? 

* * * * * 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
8222 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

(g) * * * 

(12) Have failed to find employment 

after utilizing services provided under 

title I of the Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act; 

(13) Are homeless or at risk for 

homelessness; or 

(14) Are formerly incarcerated 

individuals as defined in § 641.140. 

Angela Hanks, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Employment 

and Training, Labor. 

[FR Doc. 2022–02681 Filed 2–11–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 73 

[Docket No. FDA–2022–C–0098] 

Motif FoodWorks, Inc.; Filing of Color 

Additive Petition 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Notification of petition. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA or we) is 

announcing that we have filed a 

petition, submitted by Motif 

FoodWorks, Inc., proposing that the 

color additive regulations be amended 

to provide for the safe use of myoglobin 

as a color additive in meat and poultry 

analogue products. 

DATES: The color additive petition was 

filed on December 13, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to https://

www.regulations.gov and insert the 

docket number found in brackets in the 

heading of this document into the 

‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts, 

and/or go to the Dockets Management 

Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, 

Rockville, MD 20852. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Anderson, Center for Food Safety 

and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug 

Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., 

College Park, MD 20740, 240–402–1309. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 

section 721(d)(1) of the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 

379e(d)(1)), we are giving notice that we 

have filed a color additive petition (CAP 

2C0322), submitted by Motif 

FoodWorks, Inc., 27 Drydock Ave., 2nd 

Floor, Boston, MA 02210. The petition 

proposes to amend the color additive 

regulations in part 73 (21 CFR part 73), 

‘‘Listing of Color Additives Exempt from 

Certification,’’ to provide for the safe 

use of myoglobin as a color additive in 

meat and poultry analogue products. 

The petitioner has claimed that this 

action is categorically excluded under 

21 CFR 25.32(r) because the substance 

occurs naturally in the environment, 

and the action does not alter 

significantly the concentration or 

distribution of the substance, its 

metabolites, or degradation products in 

the environment. In addition, the 

petitioner has stated that, to their 

knowledge, no extraordinary 

circumstances exist that would warrant 

at least an environmental assessment 

(see 21 CFR 25.21). If FDA determines 

a categorical exclusion applies, neither 

an environmental assessment nor an 

environmental impact statement is 

required. If FDA determines a 

categorical exclusion does not apply, we 

will request an environmental 

assessment and make it available for 

public inspection. 

Dated: February 7, 2022. 

Lauren K. Roth, 

Associate Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2022–03109 Filed 2–11–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4164–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2020–0684, FRL–9402–01– 

R10] 

Air Plan Approval; OR; Air 

Contaminant Discharge Permit Fee 

Revision 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Oregon State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on 

November 5, 2020. The revision 

establishes new fees to be paid by 

stationary sources of air contaminants 

submitting notices of intent to construct. 

The revision also adds a new basic air 

contaminant discharge permit category 

to allow certain minor sources, that 

would otherwise be required to obtain a 

general, simple, or standard permit, the 

option to qualify for a basic permit. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 16, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2020–0684, at https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from https://

www.regulations.gov. The EPA may 

publish any comment received to its 

public docket. Do not electronically 

submit any information you consider to 

be Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information the disclosure 

of which is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. The EPA will 

generally not consider comments or 

comment contents located outside of the 

primary submission (i.e., on the web, 

cloud, or other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristin Hall, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue, Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101, 

at (206) 553–6357 or hall.kristin@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, wherever 

‘‘we’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is intended to 

refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. State Implementation Plan 

B. Air Contaminant Discharge Permits 

C. Source Notification Requirements 

II. Evaluation of Submission 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. State Implementation Plan 

Each state has a State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) containing the control 

measures and strategies used to attain 

and maintain the national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) established 

by the EPA for the criteria pollutants 

(carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen 

dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, 

sulfur dioxide). Section 110 of the Clean 

Air Act spells out the requirements for 

each SIP, including but not limited to 

air pollution control regulations, 

emissions inventories, ambient air 

monitoring, enforcement mechanisms, 

and authority to revise the SIP as 

needed. 

Revisions to the SIP are adopted by 

the state and submitted to the EPA for 

review. The EPA approves and codifies 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1