Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 44575 

1 In fiscal year 2012, the procedures for reviewing 

cases in the negative frame, discussed later, 

changed to include the State’s procedural processes 

in determining a negative case’s validity. FNS has 

referred to the negative error rate since then as the 

case and procedural error rate, or CAPER, to reflect 

this change. 

records could inform the subject of an 

investigation of an actual or potential 

criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the 

existence of that investigation and reveal 

investigative interest on the part of DHS or 

another agency. Access to the records could 

permit the individual who is the subject of 

a record to impede the investigation, to 

tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to 

avoid detection or apprehension. 

Amendment of the records could interfere 

with ongoing investigations and law 

enforcement activities. Further, permitting 

amendment to counterintelligence records 

after an investigation has been completed 

would impose an unmanageable 

administrative burden. In addition, 

permitting access and amendment to such 

information could disclose security-sensitive 

information that could be detrimental to 

homeland security. 

(c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and 

Necessity of Information) because in the 

course of investigations into potential 

violations of federal law, the accuracy of 

information obtained or introduced 

occasionally may be unclear, or the 

information may not be strictly relevant or 

necessary to a specific investigation. In the 

interests of effective law enforcement, it is 

appropriate to retain all information that may 

aid in establishing patterns of unlawful 

activity. 

(d) From subsection (e)(2) (Collection of 

Information from Individuals) because 

requiring that information be collected from 

the subject of an investigation would alert the 

subject to the nature or existence of the 

investigation, thereby interfering with that 

investigation and related law enforcement 

activities. 

(e) From subsection (e)(3) (Notice to 

Subjects) because providing such detailed 

information could impede law enforcement 

by compromising the existence of a 

confidential investigation or reveal the 

identity of witnesses or confidential 

informants. 

(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), 

and (e)(4)(I) (Agency Requirements) and (f) 

(Agency Rules), because portions of this 

system are exempt from the individual access 

provisions of subsection (d) for the reasons 

noted above, and therefore DHS is not 

required to establish requirements, rules, or 

procedures with respect to such access. 

Providing notice to individuals with respect 

to existence of records pertaining to them in 

the system of records or otherwise setting up 

procedures pursuant to which individuals 

may access and view records pertaining to 

themselves in the system would undermine 

investigative efforts and reveal the identities 

of witnesses, and potential witnesses, and 

confidential informants. 

(g) From subsection (e)(5) (Collection of 

Information) because with the collection of 

information for law enforcement purposes, it 

is impossible to determine in advance what 

information is accurate, relevant, timely, and 

complete. 

(h) From subsection (e)(8) (Notice on 

Individuals) because compliance would 

interfere with DHS’s ability to obtain, serve, 

and issue subpoenas, warrants, and other law 

enforcement mechanisms that may be filed 

under seal and could result in disclosure of 

investigative techniques, procedures, and 

evidence. 

(i) From subsection (e)(12) (Matching 

Agreements) because requiring DHS to 

provide notice of a new or revised matching 

agreement with a non-Federal agency, if one 

existed, would impair DHS operations by 

indicating which data elements and 

information are valuable to DHS’s analytical 

functions, thereby providing harmful 

disclosure of information to individuals who 

would seek to circumvent or interfere with 

DHS’s missions. 

(j) From subsection (g)(1) (Civil Remedies) 

to the extent that the system is exempt from 

other specific subsections of the Privacy Act. 

Lynn Parker Dupree, 

Chief Privacy Officer, U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security. 

[FR Doc. 2021–17004 Filed 8–12–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–9N–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Food and Nutrition Service 

7 CFR Part 275 

[FNS–2018–0043] 

RIN 0584–AE64 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 

Program: Non-Discretionary Quality 

Control Provisions of the Agricultural 

Improvement Act of 2018 

AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service 

(FNS), USDA. 

ACTION: Interim final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U. S. Department of 

Agriculture (the Department) is issuing 

this interim final rule to strengthen and 

improve the integrity and accuracy of 

the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 

Program (SNAP) Quality Control (QC) 

system by codifying statutory 

requirements enacted by the Agriculture 

Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm 

Bill) that was signed into law on 

December 20, 2018. 

DATES: 

Effective date: August 13, 2021. 

Compliance date: August 13, 2021, 

except for the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA) provisions, which are delayed 

pending approval by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). The 

Food and Nutrition Service will publish 

a document in the Federal Register 

announcing the compliance date. 

Comment dates: Written comments on 

this interim final rule must be received 

on or before October 12, 2021 to be 

assured of consideration. We will 

consider comments on the Paperwork 

Reduction Act that we receive by 

October 12, 2021. 

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: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Send comments to Stephanie 

Proska, Branch Chief, Quality Control 

Branch, Program Accountability and 

Administration Division; Food and 

Nutrition Service; 1320 Braddock Place, 

5th Floor; Alexandria, Virginia 22314. 

• Email: Send comments to 

SNAPQCReform@usda.gov. Include 

Docket ID Number FNS–2018–0043, 

‘‘SNAP: Non-Discretionary QC 

provisions of Title IV of PL 115–334’’ in 

the subject line of the message. 

• 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. FNS will make the written 

comments publicly available on the 

internet via http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephanie Proska, Food and Nutrition 

Service, 1320 Braddock Place, 5th Floor; 

Alexandria, Virginia 22314, 

SNAPQCReform@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Pursuant to Section 16 of the Food 

and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended 

(FNA), each State agency is responsible 

for monitoring and improving its 

administration of SNAP and providing 

information from the SNAP quality 

control (QC) system. For QC reviews, 

States conduct monthly reviews of a 

statistically representative sample of 

households participating in SNAP 

(active cases) and households for whom 

participation was denied, terminated, or 

suspended (negative cases). These 

reviews measure the accuracy of SNAP 

eligibility and benefit determinations 

and ultimately serve as the basis for the 

SNAP payment error rate (PER), as 

defined in Section 16(c)(2)(A) of the 

FNA, and case and procedural error rate 

(CAPER),1 respectively. The results of 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
44576 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

2https://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/27601-0002- 

41.pdf. 

3https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/integrity-snapquality-control-system. 

these reviews provide States with 

feedback on the State’s administration 

of the program, including how their 

chosen policy options, waivers, and 

business processes affect the accuracy of 

their eligibility determinations. 

SNAP QC has four goals, identified at 

7 CFR 275.10(b), which are to provide: 

(1) A systematic method of measuring 

the accuracy of the SNAP eligibility 

caseload; (2) a basis for determining all 

SNAP error rates; (3) a timely, 

continuous flow of information on 

which to base corrective action at all 

levels of administration; and (4) a basis 

for establishing State agency liability for 

errors that exceed the National 

performance measure pursuant to 

Section 16(c)(1)(C) of the FNA. 

Every Federal fiscal year (October 

through September), State agencies 

conduct QC reviews for two different 

sampling frames—the active sampling 

frame and the negative sampling frame. 

For the active frame, States review a 

sample of their overall participating 

SNAP households (those receiving 

SNAP benefits). This QC review consists 

of a detailed examination of household 

non-financial and financial 

circumstances including income, 

resources, and deductions to determine 

whether benefits were accurately 

authorized by State eligibility offices for 

cases in the active frame. For the 

negative frame, reviewers review a 

statistical sample of cases that were 

denied, suspended, or terminated to 

determine not only their accuracy, but 

also if the State agency followed the 

correct procedures according to SNAP 

regulations. 

After State agencies submit their 

completed QC reviews to the Federal 

government, Federal staff select and 

review a sub-sample of cases from the 

active and negative frames to verify the 

accuracy of the States’ QC review 

findings. A regression analysis is then 

performed utilizing both the Federal 

and State data to calculate national and 

State error rates. FNS also uses the data 

gathered through the QC review process 

for program analysis. 

Beginning in calendar year 2015, FNS 

conducted integrity reviews of all 53 

SNAP State agencies nationwide and 

USDA’s Office of Inspector General 

(OIG) conducted an audit on the SNAP 

QC review process.2 The integrity 

reviews and the OIG audit found there 

were integrity issues with the data 

submitted by State agencies. In short, 

the majority of States (42 of 53) were 

underreporting QC errors in the active 

frame. In response to these findings, 

FNS undertook significant measures, 

explained in more detail later in this 

preamble, to improve training and 

strengthen controls over the QC process. 

In some cases, the Department of Justice 

(DOJ) entered into settlement 

agreements with States for the 

underreporting of SNAP QC errors in 

violation of Federal law. 

On December 20, 2018, the President 

signed into law the Agriculture 

Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm 

Bill). Section 4013 of the 2018 Farm Bill 

included requirements to reform the 

SNAP QC system in order to further 

improve the integrity of the system and 

accuracy of the data it produces. These 

requirements build upon the 

Departmental and DOJ actions taken to 

address integrity concerns raised by 

FNS and OIG reviews. 

The 2018 Farm Bill included changes 

in three sections of the legislation that 

required SNAP to update its regulations 

accordingly. Section 4013(a) of the 2018 

Farm Bill requires ‘‘All [State SNAP] 

records, and the entire information 

systems in which records are contained 

. . .’’ be made available for inspection 

and audit by the Secretary. Section 

4013(b) of the 2018 Farm Bill required 

the Department issue an interim final 

rule that: (1) Ensures the QC system 

produces valid statistical results; (2) 

provides for the oversight of contracts 

entered into by a State to improve 

payment accuracy; (3) ensures the 

accuracy of data collected in the QC 

system; and (4) provides for the 

evaluation of the integrity of the QC 

process for a minimum of 2 State 

agencies per fiscal year, to the 

maximum extent practicable. The 

regulations within this rule reflect those 

requirements. 

Good Cause Analysis 

Pursuant to the Administrative 

Procedure Act (APA), notice and 

comment are not required prior to the 

issuance of a rule if an agency, for good 

cause, finds that ‘‘notice and public 

procedure thereon are impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest.’’ (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)). USDA 

recognizes that courts have held that the 

good cause exception to notice and 

comment rulemaking is to be narrowly 

construed and only reluctantly 

countenanced. 

As a result of the statutory 

requirement for the Department to 

promulgate an interim final rule 

addressing these issues, the Department 

finds for good cause that notice and 

public comment is unnecessary and 

contrary to the public interest for this 

rule. This interim final rule and the 

regulatory amendments described below 

address provisions of Sections 4013(a), 

as well as Section 4013(b) of the 2018 

Farm Bill that USDA was directed by 

Congress to promulgate via interim final 

rule. 

Subpart A—Administration 

Use of Third-Party Contractors 

Upholding the integrity of the QC 

system is critical to the Department’s 

responsibility for improper payment 

reporting and proper stewardship of 

taxpayer funds. Evaluation of the SNAP 

caseload and the benefits issued must be 

reliable in order to accurately measure 

SNAP payment errors. In their 

respective reviews, FNS, OIG, and DOJ 

found that a majority of States used 

third-party contractors at various times 

over the preceding 10 years to provide 

regulatory and policy advice on how to 

conduct SNAP QC reviews in their 

State. It was also found that States 

following the advice of contractors often 

underreported errors in active QC case 

reviews. Advice that contributed to the 

underreporting of errors included 

training State QC reviewers to document 

cases inappropriately, organizing 

committees that focused on developing 

methods to mitigate errors and 

underreport existing payment errors to 

FNS, and withholding information or 

disposing of cases contrary to SNAP 

regulations and established policy. 

On January 20, 2016, FNS issued a 

policy memorandum 3 on the use of 

third-party contractors for QC purposes 

to address these issues. FNS issued this 

memorandum based the understanding 

that it is within the agency’s regulatory 

authority to clarify policy. While the 

memorandum provided timely and clear 

guidance to States in response to a 

critical integrity issue, this interim final 

rule will ensure that the expectations 

are explicit. The memorandum clarified 

the appropriate use of contractors in the 

QC process and established procedures 

regarding the use of contractors to help 

ensure that activities performed under 

the contract are in accordance with 

Federal regulations and policies. The 

memorandum required a State to notify 

FNS of its intent to enter into a contract 

for the purposes of training State QC 

reviewers on SNAP regulations, 

policies, or manuals to improve 

payment accuracy, and to provide a 

copy of its contract and all deliverables 

to FNS. The memorandum emphasized 

that any activities or deliverables not 

complying with Federal regulations and 

policy would not be eligible for Federal 

reimbursement, as provided by Section 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 44577 

4State systems contain information on 

participants in a multitude of different programs, 

each of which can have (as some currently do) 

statutory and regulatory language prohibiting the 

disclosure of such information outside of said 

program. As such, the State systems must be able 

to limit user access to SNAP information only 

before sharing the system with FNS for SNAP QC 

purposes to ensure compliance with federal law. 

5On January 11, 2016, FNS published a study, 

Enhancing SNAP Quality Control Completion 

Rates, that examined the factors contributing to 

incomplete reviews of cases and described best 

practices associated with high SNAP QC 

completion rates. 

16(a) of the FNA, which authorizes the 

Secretary of Agriculture to pay each 

State agency 50 percent of all 

administrative costs involved in each 

State agency’s operation of SNAP. The 

memorandum also stipulated that FNS 

be allowed attend any training sessions 

or meetings that discussed individual 

QC cases and required that the State 

document any discussions about 

individually sampled cases within the 

QC record for subsequent review and 

auditing purposes. 

Subsequent to the issuance of this 

guidance, the 2018 Farm Bill directed 

the Department to issue interim final 

regulations to provide for the oversight 

of contracts entered into by a State 

agency for the purpose of improving 

payment accuracy. As a result, the 

Department is codifying at § 275.2(c) the 

requirements on the oversight of 

contracts previously set forth by FNS in 

the 2016 policy memorandum. This 

paragraph at § 275.2(c) will also codify 

the 2018 Farm Bill requirement at 

Section 4013(b) that any person who 

knowingly submits, or causes submittal 

of, false information in carrying out the 

QC system be debarred in accordance 

with procedures outlined in 2 CFR part 

417. This particular provision regarding 

debarment, codified through this 

interim final rule, was self-executing 

upon enactment of the 2018 Farm Bill. 

These provisions associated with 

third party contractors under 7 CFR 

275.2(c)(1) will be effective upon OMB’s 

approval of the information collection 

associated with this activity. 

State Systems Access 

Section 4013(a) of the 2018 Farm Bill 

required that all State agency records 

and the systems in which those records 

are contained be made available to the 

Department for QC purposes. To ensure 

the accuracy of data collected in SNAP 

QC and to allow for independent 

oversight of program administration, 

FNS must have access to State agency 

records and the systems in which those 

records are contained; this includes 

remote access. While mandatory FNS 

access to State computer systems for QC 

purposes has existed since the current 

QC system was implemented, it is 

necessary to specifically include remote 

access in this requirement to ensure 

Federal staff has the tools necessary to 

conduct thorough QC re-reviews from 

their duty stations. While some State 

agencies have already provided remote 

access to their systems, it has been 

difficult to gain access in some states 

due to technological and security 

challenges. These challenges include 

issues concerning equipment and 

firewalls as well as the fact that some 

State systems do not include a user role 

that allows access only to SNAP 

information.4 A new paragraph at 

§ 275.2(d) will require FNS have access, 

including remote access, to all State 

agency records and systems in which 

those records are contained. The 

Department believes this provision will 

enable State agencies to make the 

necessary changes to allow remote 

access to State computer systems for 

SNAP QC purposes, and therefore help 

ensure the accuracy of the collected data 

through the QC system. FNS will 

continue to work with States 

collaboratively to establish data sharing 

and system integrity agreements to 

facilitate the required systems access. 

This provision is effective upon 

publication of this rule. 

Federal Monitoring—Reviews of State 

Agency’s Quality Control System 

The 2018 Farm Bill further requires 

FNS to ensure that the integrity of the 

QC system is reviewed in at least two 

State agencies per fiscal year to the 

maximum extent practicable. As a 

result, the Department is adding a new 

paragraph at § 275.3(c) to use the 

existing management evaluation process 

to provide for the review of at least two 

State agency QC systems per year. The 

paragraphs currently located at 

§ 275.3(c) and (d) are being 

appropriately re-designated as § 275.3(d) 

and (e), respectively. This provision is 

effective upon publication of this rule. 

Social Security Administration (SSA) 

Processed Cases 

This rule will also ensure statistically 

valid results and improve the accuracy 

of QC data collected by State agencies 

by requiring that cases processed by the 

Social Security Administration (SSA) 

are included in the error rate. Currently, 

SSA processes applications for around 

50,000 SNAP cases a year. Less than 

one-tenth of a percent of cases sampled 

for QC review are processed by SSA. 

Current regulations require SNAP cases 

that are processed by SSA to be 

reviewed according to standard 

procedures; longstanding FNS policy 

exempts these cases from inclusion in 

the error rates. SNAP regulations at 

273.2(k)(l) provide two options for SSA 

involvement in the certification process 

for SNAP beneficiaries, which are 

designed to simplify the SNAP 

application process for households 

applying for and receiving 

Supplemental Security Income. The first 

option is for the SSA office itself to 

complete and forward applications to 

the local SNAP office, and the second is 

for the local SNAP agency to outstation 

a worker at the SSA office. Both 

processes require the SNAP agency to 

make the final determination on the 

application, meaning that even when 

SSA participates in completing the 

application, the State agency must 

clarify unclear information and ensure 

the benefit determination and allotment 

amount are correct. Since the SNAP 

agency is responsible for finalizing and 

processing applications received at SSA 

offices, including these cases in the 

error rate would ensure this population 

of households is part of the improper 

payment measurement. This would 

improve the accuracy of QC data 

collection and reporting methods. FNS 

believes that excluding these cases from 

the error rate is inconsistent with 

current Federal improper payment 

requirements and intends to correct this 

inconsistency by requiring SSA 

processed cases be included in the 

SNAP error rate. For these reasons, the 

Department is amending the following 

sections in 7 CFR to clarify that SSA 

processed cases shall be treated in the 

same manner as other SNAP cases for 

QC purposes: newly redesignated 

275.11(g); and 275.12(h), 275.13(f), 

275.21(d), and 275.23(b)(1). This 

provision is effective upon publication 

of this rule. 

Record Retention 

To further ensure the accuracy of QC 

data collected by State agencies, this 

interim final rule will also provide more 

detail on what records must be retained 

for QC case files. Past QC integrity 

management evaluation reviews 

conducted by FNS found that many 

State agencies misunderstood SNAP QC 

record retention requirements, 

including the essential document types 

that must be reported and retained. In 

addition to these FNS reviews, the OIG 

audit of the QC error rate process and 

the FNS completion rate study 5 each 

discovered intentional and 

unintentional instances of State 

agencies leaving documentary evidence 

out of the case file. As a result, Federal 

QC reviewers had insufficient 

information to review such cases and 

determine whether the information used 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
44578 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

in the State case determinations was 

accurate. When State agencies do not 

properly retain such documentary 

records, FNS cannot adequately confirm 

data accuracy and integrity. 

The Department has concluded that 

the existing regulations lack sufficient 

specificity for States to determine which 

QC-related records must be maintained 

for the required duration of three years 

post fiscal closure, which is when the 

error rate is issued for most States; for 

States in liability status, three years post 

fiscal closure begins on the date the 

State fulfills all requirements to close its 

liability. In an effort to strengthen the 

understanding of which records States 

must maintain and to increase the 

integrity of the QC system and quality 

of data, the Department is amending the 

regulatory language at § 275.4(c) to 

provide more comprehensive detail, 

including specifying that all 

correspondence with the household and 

all case notes, digital or otherwise, be 

included in the QC case file, among 

other requirements. This will help 

ensure the accuracy of QC data collected 

by State agencies. This provision is 

effective upon publication of this rule. 

Subpart F—Responsibilities for 

Reporting on Program Performance 

Quality Control Review Reports— 

Individual Cases 

In the course of conducting a QC 

review, FNS requires State agencies to 

accurately record, document, 

summarize, and code household 

circumstances, which includes 

completing the review forms associated 

with active and negative QC reviews, to 

ensure the accuracy of the data 

collected. Current regulations at 

§ 275.21(b) require States to submit 

‘‘edited’’ findings for both Form FNS– 

380–1 and Form FNS–245. When these 

QC rules were originally written, the 

‘‘edits’’ were related to the capability of 

computer systems to communicate with 

one another. Until computers were able 

to communicate more directly, without 

a dial up connection, it was common 

practice for States to review the files 

uploaded to FNS to ensure the data they 

submitted was consistent with data 

received on the other end. When the 

received data did not match what was 

sent, the State had to ‘‘edit’’ those 

mismatched fields to ensure the data 

was accurate. 

As computer technology has 

dramatically improved since this 

provision was written and 

communication errors are now the 

exception rather than the norm, it is 

necessary to remove this reference to 

‘‘edited’’ data to ensure FNS is clear that 

States are expected to submit thorough 

and final versions of the required QC 

forms to FNS. 

FNS, OIG and DOJ found that, in 

some cases, States interpreted 

§ 275.21(b) to allow significant editing 

of the facts of cases under review before 

submission to FNS and used that 

interpretation to misrepresent cases that 

contained payment errors and to 

artificially lower the reported State error 

rate. Since ‘‘editing’’ findings is an 

integrity concern and the original intent 

is no longer of concern due to 

advancements in technology, the 

Department is amending the language in 

§ 275.21(b) by removing the term, 

‘‘edited’’ from regulatory text to better 

ensure the accuracy of the data 

collected. FNS will continue to provide 

a process for States to correct typos and 

data entry errors in their submissions. 

This provision is effective upon 

publication of this rule. 

In addition, the regulation at 

§ 275.21(b) does not currently require 

States to include Form FNS–380, 

Worksheet for QC reviews, upon 

submission of QC cases to FNS. 

Currently, States are required to use the 

Form FNS–380 to record their notes and 

observations over the course of 

completing their review, but are only 

required to submit the form in the event 

that a case is selected for Federal subsample. Requiring the Form FNS–380 be 

submitted for all cases, regardless of 

whether the case was included in the 

Federal sub-sample, will provide greater 

information about SNAP households to 

FNS for program analysis purposes and 

improve the consistency of 

documentation across cases by ensuring 

States submit all pertinent information 

before knowing a case has been selected 

for Federal review. The Department 

believes requiring that the form be 

thoroughly documented and submitted 

will enable case reviewers to fully 

understand the circumstances of the 

case, final finding, and disposition, and 

the quality of the State QC reviewers’ 

submitted reviews will be improved. 

These changes will help to ensure more 

statistically valid results and will help 

to ensure the accuracy of QC data 

collected. As a result, § 275.21(b) is 

modified accordingly. This provision is 

effective upon publication of this rule. 

Procedural Matters 

Executive Order 12866 and 13563 

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. The 

Department has developed this rule in 

accordance with these orders. 

Executive Order 12866 provides that 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs (OIRA) at the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) will 

review all significant rules. OIRA has 

determined that this interim final rule is 

significant and was accordingly 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB). 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) 

must be prepared for major rules with 

economically significant effects ($100 

million or more in any one year). USDA 

does not anticipate this interim final 

rule is likely to have an economic 

impact of $100 million or more in any 

one year, and therefore, does not meet 

the definition of ‘‘economically 

significant’’ under Executive Order 

12866. 

The provisions in this rule are not 

anticipated to have any impacts on 

SNAP participation or benefit issuance 

(transfers) and most are not expected to 

have measurable impacts on State 

Agencies or the Federal Government. 

For example, the cost estimate for the 

burden associated with the new 

reporting provisions do not exceed a 

total of $110 combined for all State 

agencies per year. The interim final 

provisions implement statutory changes 

included in the 2018 Farm Bill; most of 

these statutory changes reflect policies 

and practices that are already in place 

and thus are not a substantive change 

from current practice. For example, 

requiring access to State computer 

systems for QC purposes is existing 

policy that has been in place since the 

current QC system was implemented. 

While this interim final regulation 

would clarify that FNS must have 

remote access to State computer 

systems, this requirement is expected to 

have minimal impact on State 

administrative expenses. Currently 21 

States already provide remote access to 

their systems. In 17 of these States there 

was no cost associated with allowing 

FNS access (other than Federal staff 

time to resolve firewall issues). In the 

remaining 4 States there was a small 

cost for enabling remote access ($200 for 

licensing in one State and $3000 for a 

dedicated laptop used to access all 3 of 

the other States, or an average of $800 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 44579 

per State). At $800 per State, the remote 

access requirement is expected to result 

in one-time costs of about $25,600 for 

the remaining 32 States. 

Similarly, existing policy requires a 

State to notify FNS of its intent to enter 

into a contract for the purposes of 

training State QC Reviewers (SQCRs), to 

provide a copy of its contract and all 

deliverables to FNS, and any contractor 

activities or deliverables not complying 

with Federal regulations and policy are 

not eligible for Federal reimbursement. 

Current policy also requires that the 

State document any discussions about 

individually sampled cases within the 

QC record for subsequent review and 

auditing purposes. 

In addition to codifying the existing 

requirement to document discussion 

about individually sampled cases, this 

rule places additional requirements if 

the State discusses individual sampled 

cases with a contractor. If the discussion 

occurs orally, FNS must be given notice 

24 hours in advance of the discussion 

and must be allowed to participate in 

the discussion. If the discussion occurs 

in writing, the State must ensure that 

FNS is copied on all written 

correspondence discussing individual 

sampled cases. FNS estimates this new 

notification requirement will affect 5 

State agency respondents once per year. 

Costs: 

The Department anticipates minimal 

costs associated with this rule. As noted 

above, the rule provisions primarily 

implement activities that are current 

policies and practice. 

FNS does anticipate a small increase 

in reporting burden for State agencies 

associated with the requirement that 

States notify FNS in advance or copy 

FNS on written correspondence when 

the State discusses individual sampled 

cases with a contractor. As described in 

the Paperwork Reduction Act section of 

this rule, FNS anticipates that 5 States 

will be required to submit such 

notification once per year, for an 

additional 0.4 hours in reporting burden 

annually. Because FNS has already 

addressed situations where States used 

contractors improperly, we expect 

States to discuss individual cases with 

contractors only on rare occasions. 

No additional Federal costs are 

anticipated; any staff time devoted to 

these activities will be part of the 

normal duties of Federal staff. 

Benefits: 

The Department anticipates that these 

interim final provisions will improve 

Federal oversight of State QC systems 

and improve the integrity of Statereported QC data used to determine 

SNAP error rates. 

Transfers: 

The Department does not anticipate 

any changes in transfers associated with 

this rule. 

Alternatives: 

The 2018 Farm Bill required that the 

Department implement specific changes 

to current QC operations and eliminated 

performance bonus payments to States. 

Therefore, no alternatives were 

considered. 

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 

that would minimize any significant 

impacts on a substantial number of 

small entities. Rules that are exempt 

from notice and comment are also 

exempt from the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act requirements, including conducting 

a regulatory flexibility analysis, when 

among other things the agency for good 

cause finds that notice and public 

procedure are impracticable, 

unnecessary, and contrary to the public 

interest. 

Congressional Review Act 

Pursuant to the Congressional Review 

Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

designated this rule as ‘not major’, as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Executive Order 12372 

SNAP is listed in the Catalog of 

Federal Domestic Assistance under 

Number 10.551. For the reasons set forth 

in the Final Rule codified in 7 CFR part 

3015, subpart V and the related Notice 

(48 FR 29115), this Program is excluded 

from the scope of Executive Order 

12372, which requires 

intergovernmental consultation with 

State and local officials. 

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 13121. 

The Department has considered the 

impact of this interim rule on State and 

local governments and has determined 

that this rule does not have federalism 

implications. Therefore, under Section 

6(b) of the Executive Order, a federalism 

summary is not required. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform 

This interim final rule has been 

reviewed under Executive Order 12988, 

Civil Justice Reform. This rule is 

intended to have preemptive effect with 

respect to any State or local laws, 

regulations or policies which conflict 

with its provisions or which would 

otherwise impede its full and timely 

implementation. This rule is not 

intended to have retroactive effect 

unless so specified in the Effective Dates 

section of the final rule. Prior to any 

judicial challenge to the provisions of 

the final rule, all applicable 

administrative procedures must be 

exhausted. 

Civil Rights Impact Analysis 

FNS has reviewed the interim final 

rule, in accordance with the Department 

Regulation 4300–004, Civil Rights 

Impact Analysis, to identify and address 

any major civil rights impacts the 

interim final rule might have on 

minorities, women, and persons with 

disabilities. A comprehensive Civil 

Rights Impact Analysis (CRIA) was 

conducted on the interim final rule, 

including an analysis of data and 

provisions contained in the interim final 

rule. The CRIA outlines outreach and 

mitigation strategies to lessen any 

possible civil rights impacts. The CRIA 

concludes the interim final rule will 

impact State agencies by including cases 

processed by SSA in the error rate 

determination; however, this will not 

change the rate at which these 

households are selected for review. The 

Department finds that the 

implementation of mitigation strategies 

and monitoring by the FNS Civil Rights 

Division and FNS SNAP may lessen any 

impacts. SNAP has procedures in place 

to provide special accommodations for 

the QC review should elderly persons 

and individuals with disabilities request 

accommodation. These accommodations 

are described at 7 CFR 275.12(c)(1), 

which provides that if there is a 

hardship to the household in attending 

the QC interview, the reviewer must 

interview the household’s authorized 

representative if they have one or go to 

the household’s home. Additionally, 

FNS SNAP will continue to work with 

State agencies to ensure they are aware 

of their responsibility to provide special 

accommodation for the elderly and 

disabled persons during QC reviews. If 

necessary, the FNS Civil Rights Division 

will propose further mitigation and 

outreach strategies to alleviate impacts 

that may result from the implementation 

of the interim final rule. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
44580 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

Additionally, other policy statements or 

actions that have substantial direct 

effects on one or more Indian Tribes, the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes also 

require consultation. This regulation 

discloses there are no tribal implications 

associated with this rule. FNS attended 

a tribal consultation meeting on May 1, 

2019, in Washington, DC where the 

changes to this rule were explained. No 

questions or concerns were brought to 

FNS’s attention about this rule by any 

tribal leaders at the meeting. If a tribe 

requests consultation in the future, FNS 

will work with the Office of Tribal 

Relations to ensure meaningful 

consultation is provided. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. Chap. 35; see 5 CFR 1320), 

requires that the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) approve all 

collections of information by a Federal 

agency from the public 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. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, this interim final 

rule contains information collections 

that are subject to review and approval 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget; therefore, FNS is submitting for 

public comment the changes in the 

information collection burden that 

would result from adoption of the 

proposals in the rule. The agency is 

seeking a three-year renewal date for 

both OMB control numbers. Once OMB 

approves these burden requirements 

associated with OMB Control Numbers: 

0584–0074 and 0584–0303, the agency 

plans to publish separate notices in the 

Federal Register announcing OMB’s 

approval. 

We are revising two existing burden 

inventories for this rulemaking. The 

current burden inventories affected are 

Worksheet for the Supplemental 

Nutrition Assistance Program Quality 

Control Reviews (FNS–380) OMB 

Control Number: 0584–0074, expiration 

date 04/30/2023 and Supplemental 

Nutrition Assistance Program 275 QC 

Regulations OMB Control Number: 

0584–0303, expiration date 1/31/2024 

respectively. These changes are 

contingent upon OMB approval under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

and as such are including two 60 day 

notices for comment on the affected 

collections. 

Comments on both the information 

collections in this interim final rule 

must be received by October 12, 2021. 

Send comments to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for FNS, 

Washington, DC 20503, Fax 202–395– 

7285, or email to oira_submission@

omb.eop.gov. Please also send a copy of 

your comments to any of the following: 

via mail to Stephanie Proska, Branch 

Chief, Quality Control Branch, Program 

Accountability and Administration 

Division, 1320 Braddock Place, 5th 

Floor; Alexandria, Virginia 22314; via 

fax to the attention of Stephanie Proska 

at 703–305–0928; or via email to 

SNAPHQ-WEB@fns.usda.gov. 

Comments will also be accepted through 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, and follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments electronically. All responses 

to this notice will be summarized and 

included in the request for Office of 

Management and Budget approval. All 

comments will be a matter of public 

record. For further information, or for 

copies of the information collection 

requirements, please contact Stephanie 

Proska at the address indicated above or 

email SNAPHQ-WEB@fns.usda.gov. 

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the Agency’s functions, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the 

Agency’s estimate of the proposed 

information collection burden, 

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 these requests for 

comment will be summarized and 

included in the request for OMB 

approval. All comments will also 

become a matter of public record. 

Title: Worksheet for the Supplemental 

Nutrition Assistance Program’s Quality 

Control Reviews. 

Form Number: FNS 380. 

OMB Control Number: 0584–0074. 

Expiration Date: April 30, 2023. 

Type of Request: Revision of a 

currently approved collection due to 

rulemaking. 

Abstract: Section 16 of the Food and 

Nutrition Act of 2008 provides the 

legislative basis for the operation of the 

Quality Control (QC) system. Part 275, 

Subpart C, of SNAP regulations 

implements the legislative mandates 

found in Section 16. Regulations at 7 

CFR 275.1, 275.14(d) and 275.21(a) and 

(b)(1) provide the regulatory basis for 

the QC reporting requirements. 

Section 11(a) of the Food and 

Nutrition Act of 2008 provides the 

legislative basis for the recordkeeping 

requirements. SNAP regulations, at 7 

CFR 272.1(f), specify that program 

records must be retained for three years 

from the month of origin. Regulations at 

7 CFR 275.4 specifically address record 

retention requirements for form FNS– 

380. 

Form FNS–380, is a SNAP worksheet 

used to determine eligibility and 

benefits for households selected for 

review in the QC sample of active SNAP 

cases. This form provides a systematic 

means of aiding the State’s Quality 

Control Reviewer in analyzing the case 

record, planning and doing field 

investigation and gathering, comparing, 

analyzing and evaluating data. 

Due to this interim-final rulemaking, 

the FNS 380 form must include a new 

State agency respondent burden for a 

new requirement at 7 CFR 275.2(c)(1)(v). 

The Department will require that if the 

State discusses individual sampled 

cases with a contractor, the State must 

document, within the case file, the 

contents of the discussion and any 

action taken by the State as a result of 

the discussion. If the discussion occurs 

orally, FNS must be given notice 24 

hours in advance of the discussion and 

must be allowed to participate in the 

discussion. If the discussion occurs in 

writing, the State must ensure that FNS 

is copied on all written correspondence 

discussing individual sampled cases. 

FNS estimates this new notification 

requirement will affect 5 State agency 

respondents at least one time per year 

for a total burden of 5 minutes (0.0835 

hour) per response, estimating an 

additional 25 minutes (0.40 hour) to the 

current information collection. No 

additional recordkeeping requirements 

are necessary. 

We estimate the total reporting 

burden for the collection of information 

to support SNAP QC as 405,995.67 

hours. This includes approximately 8.48 

hours for State Agencies to analyze each 

household case record including 

planning and carrying out the field 

investigation; gathering, comparing, 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 44581 

analyzing and evaluating the review 

data and forwarding selected cases to 

the Food and Nutrition Service for 

Federal validation, totaling 

approximately 382,173.44 hours for the 

entire caseload. We also include an 

average interview burden of 30 minutes 

(0.5 hours) for each household, creating 

a reporting burden for them for 

22,748.50 hours. The total reporting 

burden for the affected public is 

404,921.94 hours. Additionally, we 

estimate the recordkeeping burden per 

record for the State Agencies to be 1.4 

minutes (0.0236 hours), thereby making 

the recordkeeping burden associated 

with this information collection to be 

1,073.73 hours. There is no 

recordkeeping requirement for 

households. The total estimated 

reporting and recordkeeping burden for 

this collection is 405,995.67 hours. 

Reporting Burden Annual Estimates for 

OMB Control Number 0584–0074 

Affected Public: State, Local and 

Tribal Government and Individuals and 

Households. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

45,550 (53 State Agencies and 45,497 

Individuals/households). 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 4,293.24 (4,292.24 for State 

agencies and 1 per individual/ 

household). 

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 

272,985.95 (227,488.95 for State 

agencies and 45,497 from individuals 

and households). 

Estimated Time per Response: 8.98 

hours (8.48 hours for State agencies and 

.5 hour for individuals and households). 

Estimated Total Burden Response 

Hours: 404,921.94 (382,173.44 from 

State agencies and 22,748.50 from 

individuals/households). 

Recordkeeping Burden Annual 

Estimates for OMB Control Number 

0584–0074 

Number of Record Keepers: 53. 

Number of Records per Record 

Keeper: 858.43 Records. 

Estimated Number of Records/ 

Response to Keep: 45,497 Records. 

Recordkeeping time per Response: 

.0236 hours. 

Total Estimated Recordkeeping 

Burden Hours: 1,073.73 hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Reporting 

and Recordkeeping Burden on 

Respondents: 405,995 hours. 

This information collection request 

associated with OMB Control Number: 

0584–0074 reflects a difference of +0.40 

hour due to program changes for 

rulemaking. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
44582 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations Reg. section Affected public Description of activity Estimated number of respondents Estimated responses per respondent Revised total annual responses Revised number of burden hours per response Revised estimated total burden hours Previous submission total hours Difference due to program changes Difference due to adjustments Reporting Burden for State Agencies FNS 380, OMB 0584–0074 275.2(c)(1)(v) ........ SA .......................... Notification to discuss individual cases. 5 1 5 0.08 0.4 n/a 0.40 n/a 275.12 (b) ............. SA .......................... Household Case Record Review 53 858.43 45,496.79 3 136,490.37 136,490.37 0.00 0.00 275.12 (c) ............. SA .......................... Field investigation ........................ 53 858.43 45,496.79 3.5 159,238.77 159,238.77 0.00 0.00 275.12 (c)(1) ......... SA .......................... Personal interviews ..................... 53 858.43 45,496.79 0.5 22,748.40 22,748.40 0.00 0.00 275.12 (b) ............. SA .......................... Variance identification ................. 53 858.43 45,496.79 0.9 40,947.11 40,947.11 0.00 0.00 275.12 (b) ............. SA .......................... Error analysis .............................. 53 858.43 45,496.79 0.5 22,748.40 22,748.40 0.00 0.00 State Agencies (SA) Reporting Burden—Subtotals. 53 .......................... 4,292.24 ................. 227,488.95 ................................... 8.48 382,173.44 382,173.04 0.40 0.00 Reporting Burden for Individuals/Households FNS 380, OMB 0584–0074 275.12 (c)(1) ......... Individual/House- holds. Personal interviews ..................... 45,497 1 45,497 0.5 22,748.50 22,748.50 0.00 0.00 Individuals/Households (I/H) Reporting Burden—Subtotals. 45,497 ................... 1 ............................. 45,497 ......................................... 0.5 22,748.50 22,748.50 0.00 0.00 Grand To- tals Re- porting Burden. 45,550.00 ............... 4,293.24 ....................................... 272,985.95 8.98 404,921.94 404,921.54 0.40 0.00 

RECORDKEEPING

BURDEN FOR

STATE

AGENCIES FNS 380, OMB 0584–0074 

Reg. section Affected public Description of activity 

Estimated 

number of 

respondents 

Estimated 

responses per 

respondent 

Revised 

total annual 

responses 

Revised 

number of 

burden hours 

per response 

Revised 

estimated 

total burden 

hours 

Previous 

submission 

total hours 

Difference 

due to 

program 

changes 

Difference 

due to 

adjustments 

275.4 ..................... State Agencies ....... Record Retention ........................ 53 858.43 45,497 0.0236 1,073.73 1,073.73 0.00 0.00 

Overall Grand Total Reporting SA & I/H and Recordkeeping for SA.

45,550.00 .............. 6.99 ........................ 318,482.95 .................................. 9.00 405,995.67 405,995.27 0.40 0.00 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 44583 

* * * * * 

Action: 60 day Notice. 

Summary: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 

notice invites the general public and 

other public agencies to comment on 

this information collection in this 

interim final rule. This collection is a 

revision of a currently approved 

information collection request. 

Dates: Written comments must be 

received on or before October 12, 2021. 

Send Comments to: The Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for FNS, 

Washington, DC 20503, Fax 202–395– 

7285, or email to oira_submission@

omb.eop.gov. Please also send a copy of 

your comments to one of the following: 

via mail to Stephanie Proska, Branch 

Chief, Quality Control Branch, Program 

Accountability and Administration 

Division, 1320 Braddock Place, 5th 

Floor; Alexandria, Virginia 22314; via 

fax to the attention of Stephanie Proska 

at 703–305–0928; or via email to 

SNAPHQ-WEB@fns.usda.gov. 

Comments will also be accepted through 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, and follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments electronically. All responses 

to this notice will be summarized and 

included in the request for Office of 

Management and Budget approval. All 

comments will be a matter of public 

record. For further information, or for 

copies of the information collection 

requirements, please contact Stephanie 

Proska at the address indicated above or 

email SNAPHQ-WEB@fns.usda.gov. 

Supplementary Information 

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions that were 

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. 

Title: Supplemental Nutrition 

Assistance Program (SNAP). 

Form Number: FNS 74 A and FNS 

74B. 

OMB Number: 0584–0303. 

Expiration Date: January 31, 2024. 

Type of Request: Revision of a 

currently approved collection. 

Abstract: Section 16 of the Food and 

Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended, 

provides the legislative basis for the 

operation of the SNAP QC system. Part 

275, Subpart C, of SNAP regulations 

implements the legislative mandates 

found in Section 16. Section 11(d) of the 

Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as 

amended (the Act), requires each State 

agency administering SNAP to submit a 

plan of operation specifying the manner 

in which the program is conducted and 

Section 11(e) of the Act authorizes the 

inclusion of other provisions as required 

by regulation. In Part 275, due to this 

interim final rulemaking there will now 

be five components of the Quality 

Control (QC) system that are covered in 

this required information collection. 

They are: (1) The sampling plan; (2) 

Third party contractors (new 

requirement); (3) the arbitration process; 

(4) the good cause process; and (5) QCrelated New Investments. 

Each State agency is required to 

develop a sampling plan that 

demonstrates the integrity of its case 

selection process. The QC system is 

designed to measure each State agency’s 

payment error rate and case and 

procedural error rate based on a 

statistically valid sample of SNAP cases. 

A State agency’s payment error rate 

represents the proportion of cases that 

were reported through a QC review as 

being ineligible, as well as the 

proportion of SNAP benefits that were 

either overissued or under-issued to 

SNAP households. A State agency’s case 

and procedural error rate represents the 

correctness of a proportion of cases that 

were measured in a QC review in which 

the State agency took an action to deny 

an application or suspend or terminate 

the benefits of a participating 

household. It also includes the accuracy 

of measuring a State’s compliance with 

Federal procedural requirements for 

those actions, which include the 

timeliness of the action and adherence 

to notice requirements. 

Due to this interim-final rulemaking, 

the QC system will require States to 

notify FNS about its intent to hire third 

party contractors for QC purposes, send 

FNS the signed contracts that are 

awarded, send FNS information on the 

third party contractor’s completed 

deliverables to FNS, and notify FNS of 

training sessions that will be hosted by 

3rd party contractors in the event the 

State agency intends to request federal 

reimbursement for administrative 

expenses associated with the third party 

contract. 

The QC system also contains 

procedures for resolving differences in 

review findings between State Agencies 

and FNS. This is referred to as the 

arbitration process. As part of the 

arbitration process, State agencies must 

defend, in writing, their disagreement 

with the Federal re-reviewer’s finding or 

disposition of a case and submit their 

defense to the arbitrator for a decision 

to be made on their disagreement. Due 

to this interim-final rulemaking, the 

regulatory reference is being updated to 

the revised designation of 7 CFR 

275.2(d)(4). 

The QC system also contains 

procedures that provide relief for State 

agencies from all or a part of a QC 

liability when a State agency can 

demonstrate that a part or all of an 

excessive error rate was due to an 

unusual event that had an 

uncontrollable impact on the State 

agency’s payment error rate. This is 

referred to as the good cause process. 

Finally, when a State agency is unable 

to demonstrate that a part or all of an 

excessive error rate was due to an 

unusual event that had an 

uncontrollable impact on the State 

agency’s payment error rate and chooses 

to settle with FNS by investing fifty 

percent of their total QC liability using 

new State agency funds into the SNAP 

program to target the root causes of their 

errors, the State agency must submit a 

new investment plan and, after 

approval, new investment progress 

reports every six months until the plan 

is complete. 

Note: The ability for a State agency to 

settle its error rate related liability is 

described in Section 16(c) of the Food 

and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended. 

Burden for the QC system includes 

reporting and recordkeeping burden for 

State agencies to create a QC sampling 

plan, notify and submit the required 

information regarding the use of third 

party contractors to FNS, and 

participate in the arbitration, good 

cause, new investment plan and new 

investment progress report processes. 

The requested extension of 

unchanged estimates and revisions for 

the reporting burdens due to new 

requirements for each component are as 

follows: (1) The estimated annual 

reporting burden associated with the QC 

sampling plan is 1,060 hours, no change 

from the current collection; (2) the four 

new annual collection estimates for 

reporting burden associated with the 

notifications and submissions activities 

of third party contractors combined 

estimates is 3.99 hours; (3) the estimated 

annual reporting burden associated with 

arbitration is 1,224 hours, no change 

from the current collection; (4) The 

estimated annual reporting burden 

associated with the good cause process 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
44584 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

is 160 hours, no change from the current 

collection; (5) The estimated annual 

reporting burden associated with the 

new investment plan is 288 hours, no 

change from the current collection-no 

74A form changes either; and finally (6) 

The estimated annual reporting burden 

associated with the new investment 

progress report is 90 hours, no change 

from the current collection-no 74B form 

changes, either. 

We are requesting 2,825.99 estimate 

annual reporting burden hours. This 

total includes the current estimate for 

this requested total estimated reporting 

burden for the QC system is 2,822.00, 

plus an increase of 3.99 hours due to 

program changes for this rulemaking. 

The requested annual recordkeeping 

burden associated with the QC sampling 

plan remains at 1.25 hours per year. No 

recordkeeping is required for the third 

party contractor provisions, since states 

have their own rules for recordkeeping 

State contracts. The annual 

recordkeeping burden associated with 

arbitration is 0.8496 and the good cause 

process burden is 0.0236 hour, both 

remain the same as the current 

collection. The estimated recordkeeping 

burden for the QC-related new 

investment plans remains at 0.0214 

hours and the estimated recordkeeping 

burden for the QC-related new 

investment progress reports remains at 

0.4248 hours. 

The burden for recordkeeping has 

remained at 2.7612 hours. As a result, 

the overall annual reporting and 

recordkeeping burden for the QC 

system, as proposed by this notice, 

increased from 2135.76 hours to 

2,828.75 hours due to the interim-final 

rule provisions adding reporting 

requirements related to State agency use 

of third party contractors. 

Affected Public: 53 State, Local and 

Tribal Government. 

Reporting Burden Annual Estimates for 

OMB Control Number 0584–0303 

Affected Public: State, Local and 

Tribal Government. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 53 

State Agencies. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 2.4339. 

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 

129. 

Estimated Time per Response: 

21.906899 hours. 

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 

2,825.99 hours. 

Recordkeeping Burden Annual 

Estimates for OMB Control Number 

0584–0303 

Number of Record Keepers: 53. 

Number of Records per Record 

Keeper: 117 Records. 

Estimated Number of Records/ 

Response to Keep: 2.2075 Records. 

Recordkeeping Time per Response: 

0.118 hours. 

Total Estimated Recordkeeping 

Burden Hours: 2.7612 hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Reporting 

and Recordkeeping Burden on 

Respondents: 2,828.75 hours. 

This information collection request 

associated with OMB Control Number: 

0584–0303 reflects an increase of 3.99 

hours due to program changes for 

rulemaking. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 44585 

275 REGS

REPORTING OMB 0584–0303 

Reg. section Affected public Description of activity 

Estimated 

number of 

respondents 

Estimated 

responses per 

respondent 

Revised 

total annual 

responses 

Revised 

number of 

burden hours 

per response 

Revised 

estimated 

total burden 

hours 

Previous 

submission 

total hours 

Difference 

due to 

program 

changes 

Difference 

due to 

adjustments 

275.11(a)(1)–(a)(2) State Agencies ................. Sampling Plan .................. 53 1 53 20 1,060 1,060 0 0 275.2(c)(1)(i) ......... State Agencies ................. Use of 3rd Party Contractors-Notification of intent 

to hire.

3 1 3 0.25 0.75 0 0.75 0 

275.2(c)(1)(ii) ........ State Agencies ................. Use of 3rd Party Contractors-Submission of 

signed contract and tasks.

3 1 3 0.5 1.5 0 1.5 0 

275.2(c)(1)(iii) ....... State Agencies ................. Use of 3rd Party Contractors-Submission of completed deliverables. 3 1 3 0.5 1.5 0 1.5 0 275.2(c)(1)(iv) ....... State Agencies ................. Use of 3rd Party Contractors-Notification of training sessions. 3 1 3 0.08 0.24 0 0.24 0 275.2(d)(4) ............ State Agencies ................. Arbitration Process ........... 12 3 36 34 1,224 1,224 0 0 273.23(f) ............... State Agencies ................. Good Cause Process ....... 1 1 1 160 160 160 0 0 275.23(h) .............. State Agencies ................. New Investment Plan 

Template Form FNS 74 A.

9 1 9 32 288 288 0 0 

275.23(h)(4) .......... State Agencies ................. New Investment Progress 

Report Template Form FNS 74 B.

9 2 18 5 90 90 0 0 

SUB-TOTAL REPORTING BURDEN.

53 .......................... 2.433962264 ..................... 129 .................................... 21.90689922 2,825.99 2,822 3.99 0 

275 RECORDKEEPING OMB 0584–0303 

Reg. section Affected public Description of activity 

Estimated 

number of 

respondents 

Estimated 

responses per 

respondent 

Revised 

total annual 

responses 

Revised 

number of 

burden hours 

per response 

Revised 

estimated 

total burden 

hours 

Previous 

submission 

total hours 

Difference 

due to 

program 

changes 

Difference 

due to 

adjustments 

275.4 ..................... State Agencies ................. Sampling Plan Record Retention. 53 1 53 0.0236 1.2508 1.2508 0 0 275.4 ..................... State Agencies ................. Arbitration Process Record 

Retention.

12 3 36 0.0236 0.8496 0.8496 0 0 

275.4 ..................... State Agencies ................. Good Cause Process 

Record Retention.

1 1 1 0.0236 0.0236 0.0236 0 0 

275.4 ..................... State Agencies ................. New Investment Plan 

Template Form FNS 74 A Record Retention.

9 1 9 0.0236 0.2124 0.2124 0 0 

275.4 ..................... State Agencies ................. New Investment Progress 

Report Template Form FNS 74 B Record Retention.

9 2 18 0.0236 0.4248 0.4248 0 0 

Sub Total RECORDKEEPING.

53 .......................... 2.20754717 ....................... 117 .................................... 0.118 2.7612 2.7612 0 0 

Reg. section Affected public Description of activity 

Estimated 

number of 

respondents 

Number of 

reports 

annually 

by state 

Number of 

total annual 

records 

Estimated 

time per 

record 

Estimated 

total record 

keeping hours 

Previous 

submission 

total hours 

Difference 

due to 

program 

changes 

Difference 

due to 

adjustments 

Grand Total REPORTING & RECORDKEEPING.

53 .......................... 4.41509434 ....................... 234 .................................... 12.08868034 2,828.7512 2,824.7612 3.99 0 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
44586 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

E-Government Act Compliance 

The Department is committed to 

complying with the E-Government Act 

of 2002, to promote the use of the 

internet and other information 

technologies to provide increased 

opportunities for citizen access to 

Government information and services, 

and for other purposes. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 275 

Grant programs-social programs, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Accordingly, 7 CFR part 275 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 275—PERFORMANCE 

REPORTING SYSTEM 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 275 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2011–2036. 

■ 2. Amend § 275.2 by adding 

paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows. 

§ 275.2 State agency responsibilities. 

* * * * * 

(c) Use of third party contractors. Any 

State agency procuring services of a 

contractor for quality control related 

services, including any project or 

training that involves the interpretation 

of SNAP regulations, policies, or 

handbooks for quality control or 

payment accuracy purpose, must ensure 

that all activities and deliverables 

performed by the contractor within the 

scope of the contract adhere to Federal 

law, regulations, and policies. Activities 

performed or deliverables provided by a 

contractor that are not in accordance 

with Federal law, regulations, or 

policies are unallowable SNAP 

administrative costs and are not eligible 

for Federal reimbursement. 

(1) For expenses related to the hiring 

of a contractor for any quality control 

related work to qualify for SNAP 

administrative cost reimbursement 

under § 277.4(b), FNS requires the 

following: 

(i) The State must notify FNS in 

writing of its intent to hire a contractor 

at least 30 days prior to entering into the 

contract to do so. The notification must 

include a copy of the selected 

contractor’s complete proposal, which 

must receive FNS approval before the 

State may proceed with the procuring 

the contract. 

(ii) Once the contract is procured, the 

State must submit to FNS a copy of the 

signed contract and documentation that 

outlines all tasks and deliverables to be 

performed or produced by the 

contractor. 

(iii) The State must submit to FNS a 

copy of all deliverables, including any 

training materials, provided by the 

contractor. 

(iv) The State must notify FNS of the 

date, time, and location of any training 

sessions led by the contractor at least 10 

days in advance of the training. FNS 

shall be allowed to attend any such 

training session with or without 

providing prior notice to the State 

agency or the contractor. 

(v) If the State discusses individual 

sampled cases with the contractor, the 

State must document, within the case 

file, the contents of the discussion and 

any action taken by the State as a result 

of the discussion. If the discussion 

occurs orally, FNS shall be given notice 

24 hours in advance of the discussion 

and shall be allowed to participate in 

the discussion. If the discussion occurs 

in writing, the State must ensure that 

FNS is copied on all written 

correspondence discussing individual 

sampled cases. 

(2) Copies of documentation and 

notices required in paragraph (c)(1) of 

this section must be provided to the 

appropriate FNS Regional SNAP 

Director. 

(3) In accordance with the nonprocurement debarment procedures 

under 2 CFR part 417, or successor 

regulations, FNS shall debar any person 

that, in carrying out the quality control 

system, knowingly submits or causes to 

be submitted false information to FNS. 

(4) Compliance date: Paragraph (c)(1) 

of this section contains informationcollection requirements. Compliance 

with paragraph (c)(1) will not be 

required until this paragraph (c)(4) is 

removed or contains a compliance date, 

after review of such requirements by the 

Office of Management and Budget 

pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction 

Act. 

(d) FNS Access to State Systems. 

Subject to data and security protocols 

agreed to by FNS and a State agency 

administering SNAP, each State agency 

shall ensure that FNS has complete 

access, including remote access for QC 

purposes, to both the records that are 

used in the administration of SNAP, 

including but not limited to the records 

contained within certification and EBT 

systems, and the information systems in 

which such records are contained. 

■ 3. In § 275.3: 

■ a. Redesignate paragraphs (c) and (d) 

as paragraphs (d) and (e); and 

■ b. Add a new paragraph (c). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 275.3 Federal Monitoring. 

* * * * * 

(c) Reviews of State Agency’s Quality 

Control System. FNS will conduct a 

management evaluation (ME) of at least 

two State Quality Control systems 

annually, to the maximum extent 

practicable. The ME will include, but 

not be limited to, a determination of 

whether the State agency is complying 

with FNS regulations; an assessment of 

the State agency’s methods and 

procedures for conducting and 

managing the Quality Control system; 

and an assessment of the data collected 

by the State agency and submitted to the 

FNS Regional Office for conducting 

reviews. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 275.4 by revising 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 275.4 Record retention. 

* * * * * 

(c) QC review records consist of 

Forms FNS–380, Worksheet for 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 

Program, FNS–380–1, Quality Control 

Review Schedule, FNS–245, Negative 

Quality Control Review Schedule; other 

materials supporting the review 

decision, including all correspondence 

with the household and all case notes, 

digital or otherwise, taken or used by 

the eligibility worker that are applicable 

to the review period; sample lists; 

sampling frames; tabulation sheets; and 

reports of the results of all quality 

control reviews during each review 

period. 

■ 5. In § 275.11 amend paragraph (g) by: 

■ a. Revising the paragraph heading; 

■ b. In the first sentence, removing the 

phrase, ‘‘, and households participating 

based upon an application processed by 

Social Security Administration 

personnel’’; 

■ c. In the third sentence, removing the 

term ‘‘§ 275.21(e)’’ and adding, in its 

place, the term ‘‘§ 275.21(d)’’; 

■ d. In the third sentence removing the 

term ‘‘§ 275.23(b)(2)’’ and adding, in its 

place, the term ‘‘§ 275.23(b)(1)’’; and 

■ e. Removing the sixth and seventh 

sentences. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 275.11 Sampling. 

* * * * * 

(g) Demonstration projects. * * * 

■ 6. In § 275.12 amend paragraph (h) by: 

■ a. Revising the paragraph heading; 

and 

■ b. Removing the third and fourth 

sentences. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 275.12 Review of active cases. 

* * * * * 

(h) Demonstration projects. * * * 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 44587 

■ 7. In § 275.13 amend paragraph (f) by: 

■ a. Revising the paragraph heading; 

and 

■ b. Removing the last sentence. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 275.13 Review of negative cases. 

* * * * * 

(f) Demonstration projects. * * * 

■ 8. In § 275.21: 

■ a. Revise paragraph (b); and 

■ b. In paragraph (d): 

■ i. Revise the paragraph heading; and 

■ ii. Removing the phrase ‘‘/SSA 

processed cases’’ from the first sentence. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 275.21 Quality control review reports. 

* * * * * 

(b) Individual cases. The State agency 

shall report the review findings on each 

case selected for review during the 

sample month. For active cases, the 

State agency shall thoroughly document 

the Quality Control Review Schedule, 

Form FNS–380, to ensure any 

subsequent case reviewers fully 

understand household circumstances 

pertaining to the QC review as well as 

the reasons for the individual case 

finding and disposition. The State 

agency shall also code the findings on 

the Form FNS–380–1. For negative 

cases, the State agency shall submit a 

summary report, coded and documented 

on the Negative Quality Control Review 

Schedule, Form FNS–245, in enough 

detail to ensure subsequent case 

reviewers fully understand the reasons 

for the individual finding and 

disposition. The review findings shall 

be reported as follows: 

* * * * * 

(d) Demonstration projects. * * * 

■ 9. In § 275.23 amend paragraph (b)(1) 

by: 

■ a. Revising the paragraph heading; 

and 

■ b. Removing the second and third 

sentences of the paragraph. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 275.23 Determination of State agency 

program performance. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) Demonstration projects. * * * 

* * * * * 

Stacy Dean, 

Deputy Under Secretary, Food, Nutrition and 

Consumer Services. 

[FR Doc. 2021–17254 Filed 8–12–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–30–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 985 

[Doc. No. AMS–SC–20–0087; SC21–985–1 

FR] 

Marketing Order Regulating the 

Handling of Spearmint Oil Produced in 

the Far West; Salable Quantities and 

Allotment Percentages for the 2021– 

2022 Marketing Year 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule implements a 

recommendation from the Far West 

Spearmint Oil Administrative 

Committee to establish salable 

quantities and allotment percentages for 

Class 1 (Scotch) and Class 3 (Native) 

spearmint oil produced in Washington, 

Idaho, Oregon, and designated parts of 

Nevada and Utah (the Far West) for the 

2021–2022 marketing year. 

DATES: Effective September 13, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joshua R. Wilde, Marketing Specialist, 

or Gary Olson, Regional Director, 

Northwest Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Specialty Crops Program, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (503) 326– 

2724, or Email: Joshua.R.Wilde@

usda.gov or GaryD.Olson@usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Richard Lower, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Specialty Crops Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: 

Richard.Lower@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, 

amends regulations issued to carry out 

a marketing order as defined in 7 CFR 

900.2(j). This rule is issued under 

Marketing Order No. 985, as amended (7 

CFR part 985), regulating the handling 

of spearmint oil produced in the Far 

West. Part 985 (referred to as the 

‘‘Order’’) is effective under the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), 

hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’ The 

Far West Spearmint Oil Administrative 

Committee (Committee) locally 

administers the Order and is comprised 

of spearmint oil producers operating 

within the area of production, and a 

public member. 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this final rule in 

conformance with Executive Orders 

12866 and 13563. 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, reducing costs, 

harmonizing rules, and promoting 

flexibility. This action falls within a 

category of regulatory actions that the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) exempted from Executive Order 

12866 review. 

This final rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 13175— 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments, which 

requires agencies to consider whether 

their rulemaking actions would have 

tribal implications. AMS has 

determined this final rule is unlikely to 

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. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This rule is not intended to 

have retroactive effect. Under the Order 

now in effect, salable quantities and 

allotment percentages may be 

established for classes of spearmint oil 

produced in the Far West. This rule 

establishes quantities and allotment 

percentages for Scotch and Native 

spearmint oil for the 2021–2022 

marketing year, which begins on June 1, 

2021. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

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

handler subject to a marketing order 

may file with USDA a petition stating 

that the marketing order, any provision 

of the marketing order, or any obligation 

imposed in connection with the 

marketing order is not in accordance 

with law and request a modification of 

the marketing order or to be exempted 

therefrom. Such a handler is afforded 

the opportunity for a hearing on the 

petition. After the hearing, USDA would 

rule on the petition. The Act provides 

that the district court of the United 

States in any district in which the 

handler is an inhabitant, or has his or 

her principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on 

the petition, provided an action is filed 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES