Expansion of the Rental Subsidy Policy for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Applicants and Recipients

As Enacted ( Federal Register)

Cited in

Published date	11 April 2024
Record Number	2024-07675
Court	Social Security Administration

25507

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 71 / Thursday, April 11, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

See 42 U.S.C. 1382 and 20 CFR 416.202 for a

list of the eligibility requirements. See also 20 CFR

416.420 for general information on how we

compute the amount of the monthly payment by

reducing the benefit rate by the amount of

countable income as calculated under the rules in

subpart K of 20 part 416.

20 CFR 416.1201(a).

20 CFR 416.1102. See also 20 CFR 416.1103 for

examples of items that are not considered income.

See 42 U.S.C. 1382a and 20 CFR 416.1102

through 416.1124.

See 20 CFR 416.1104.

See 20 CFR 416.1110 and 416.1120.

See 20 CFR 416.1111(d), 416.1112, 416.1123(c),

and 416.1124.

See 20 CFR 416.1123(c) and 416.1131 through

416.1147.

See 20 CFR 416.1130(b). We recently published

a final rule to remove food from the calculation of

ISM. See Omitting Food From In-Kind Support and

Maintenance Calculations, 89 FR 21199 (Mar. 27,

2024). The amendatory language shown below

reflects changes to 20 CFR 416.1130 made by that

final rule, since it has been published, although the

change will not be effective until September 30,

2024.

See 20 CFR 416.1130(b).

20 CFR 416.1130(b).

See id. See also 20 CFR 416.1101.

See 20 CFR 416.1101. Federal Benefit Rate

(FBR) means the maximum Federal monthly

payment rate for an eligible individual or couple.

It is the figure from which we subtract countable

income to find out how much your Federal SSI

benefit should be. The FBR does not include the

rate for any State supplement paid by us on behalf

of a State. The FBR for 2024 is $943 for an

individual or $1,415 for an eligible individual with

an eligible spouse.

When an SSI applicant or recipient receives

ISM and the one-third reduction rule does not

apply, we use the presumed value rule (PMV).

Instead of determining the actual dollar value, we

presume that the ISM received is worth a maximum

value. This maximum value (or PMV) is one-third

of the FBR plus the amount of the general income

exclusion ($20). See 20 CFR 416.1140 and POMS

SI 00835.300. In 2024, the PMV is $334.33 for an

individual.

For the purposes of this exercise, we are

assuming there is no other countable income. In a

real-world case, at times there are other countable

income sources, and in such cases those income

sources would factor into the monthly payment

amount as well.

Thea D. Rozman Kendler,

Assistant Secretary for Export

Administration.

[FR Doc. 2024–07760 Filed 4–10–24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

20 CFR Part 416

[Docket No. SSA–2023–0010]

RIN 0960–AI82

Expansion of the Rental Subsidy

Policy for Supplemental Security

Income (SSI) Applicants and

Recipients

AGENCY

: Social Security Administration.

ACTION

: Final rule.

SUMMARY

: We are finalizing our

proposed regulation to apply

nationwide the In-Kind Support and

Maintenance (ISM) rental subsidy

exception that has until now been

available only for SSI applicants and

recipients residing in seven States. This

final rule provides that a ‘‘business

arrangement’’ exists, such that the SSI

applicant or recipient is not considered

to be receiving ISM in the form of room

or rent, when the amount of monthly

required rent for the property equals or

exceeds the presumed maximum value

(PMV).

DATES

: This final rule will be effective

September 30, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

Tamara Levingston, Office of Income

Security Programs, 6401 Security Blvd.,

Robert M. Ball Building, Suite 2512B,

Woodlawn, MD 21235, 410–966–7384.

For information on eligibility or filing

for benefits, call our national toll-free

number, 1–800–772–1213 or TTY 1–

800–325–0778, or visit our internet site,

Social Security Online, at https://

www.ssa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Background

The SSI program provides monthly

payments to: (1) adults and children

with a disability or blindness; and (2)

adults aged 65 or older. Eligible

individuals must meet all the

requirements set forth in the Social

Security Act (Act), including having

resources and income below specified

amounts.

Resources are cash or other

liquid assets or any real or personal

property that individuals (or their

spouses, if any) own and could convert

to cash to be used for their support and

maintenance.

Income is anything

individuals receive in cash or in-kind

that they can use to meet their food and

shelter needs.

An individual’s

resources may affect their eligibility to

receive SSI, while their income may

affect both their eligibility for payments

and the amount of payments they are

eligible to receive.

The Act and our regulations

define

income as ‘‘earned,’’ such as wages from

work, and ‘‘unearned,’’ such as gifted

cash.

Both earned income and

unearned income include items

received in-kind.

This final rule

pertains to rental subsidy, which is a

type of ISM under the broader umbrella

of unearned income. Generally, we

value in-kind items at their current

market value, and we apply various

exclusions for both earned and

unearned income.

However, we have

special rules for valuing ISM that is

received as unearned income.

ISM includes shelter that is given to

an individual or that the individual

receives because someone else pays for

it.

For example, an SSI applicant or

recipient whose friend allows them to

live rent-free at an investment property

owned by the friend, or whose friend

pays their rent, receives ISM in the form

of shelter. Shelter includes room, rental

payments, mortgage payments, real

property taxes, heating fuel, gas,

electricity, water, sewerage, and garbage

collection services.

Rental Subsidy

Our regulations clarify that an

individual is not receiving ISM in the

form of room or rent if they are paying

the monthly required rent charged

under a ‘‘business arrangement.’’

Under our general regulatory definition

prior to this final rule, a ‘‘business

arrangement’’ existed when the amount

of monthly required rent equaled or

exceeded the current market rental

value (CMRV)—that is, the price of rent

on the open market in the individual’s

locality.

To illustrate, if the owner of

an apartment would rent that property

to any potential tenant for $800 per

month, then the CMRV is $800 per

month. Consequently, in this example,

if an SSI applicant or recipient agrees to

pay the landlord rent in the amount of

$800 per month, a ‘‘business

arrangement’’ would exist and the SSI

applicant or recipient would not be

receiving ISM in the form of room or

rent. The SSI applicant or recipient in

this example would thereby—absent

any other countable income or

resources—receive the Federal Benefit

Rate (FBR).

Conversely, if the SSI

applicant or recipient agrees to pay the

landlord less than the CMRV of $800

per month (for example, $400 per

month), we would impute the difference

between the CMRV and the monthly

required rent as ISM received by the

applicant or recipient in the form of

room or rent (up to the PMV, which is

$334.33 in 2024).

In this example, the

landlord agrees to accept a rent of $400

per month instead of the CMRV of $800.

The rental subsidy amount is $400.

However, the PMV is $334.33 in 2024,

so only $314.33 would be counted as

ISM (after we subtract the $20 general

income exclusion from the PMV and

assuming there is no other income).

Consequently, in this example the SSI

recipient would receive $628.67 as a

monthly payment in 2024

(the 2024

FBR ($943) minus the PMV and minus

the general income exclusion ($314.33

(or $334.33¥$20)) = $628.67).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:36 Apr 10, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM 11APR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

25508

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 71 / Thursday, April 11, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

See 20 CFR 416.1130(b); Jackson v. Schweiker,

683 F.2d 1076 (7th Cir. 1982).

See Acquiescence Ruling (AR) 90–2(2): Ruppert

v. Bowen, 871 F.2d 1172 (2d Cir. 1989)—Evaluation

of a Rental Subsidy as In-Kind Income for

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Benefit

Calculation Purposes—Title XVI of the Social

Security Act. When this final rule becomes

effective, we will rescind AR 90–2(2) as obsolete,

in accordance with 20 CFR 416.1485(e)(4).

See Diaz v. Chater, No. 3:95–cv–01817–X (N.D.

Tex. Apr. 17, 1996); POMS SIDAL 00835.380.

88 FR 57910.

See 88 FR 57910, 57910–12 (Aug. 24, 2023).

Id. at 57912–13.

Id. at 57911–12. See also Ruppert v. Bowen,

871 F.2d 1172 (2d. Cir. 1989); Jackson v. Schweiker,

683 F.2d 1076 (7th Cir. 1982).

See 88 FR 57912. See also Jackson, 683 F.2d

at 1082–87.

See 88 FR 57912. See also Ruppert, 871 F.2d

at 1079–81.

See 88 FR 57912. See also AR 90–2(3), 55 FR

28947, 28949 (July 16, 1990).

Exception

Following court cases that challenged

how we applied these ISM rules for

rental subsidy, we provided an

exception for residents of the Seventh

Circuit (in our regulations),

residents

of the Second Circuit (in an

Acquiescence Ruling),

and residents

of Texas (in the Program Operations

Manual System (POMS)).

For

residents of these seven excepted States

(Connecticut, New York, Vermont,

Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Texas),

a ‘‘business arrangement’’ exists when

the monthly required rent equals or

exceeds the PMV (instead of the CMRV).

Application of this rental subsidy

exception tends to reduce or eliminate

the amount of ISM counted towards an

individual’s SSI payment, which

generally results in a higher SSI

payment amount. In the example,

discussed above, an SSI applicant or

recipient living in one of the seven

excepted States who agrees to pay $400

per month for an apartment with a

CMRV of $800 per month would not be

charged ISM because their monthly

required rent is more than the PMV

($334.33 for 2024). Consequently, the

SSI applicant or recipient would

continue to receive the FBR (provided

they did not have any other countable

income or resources for SSI purposes).

Proposed Rule

Consistent with the Social Security

Administration’s Agency Strategic Plan

for Fiscal Years 2022–2026, and with

the stated goal of simplifying the SSI

program, advancing equality, and

promoting uniform treatment of rental

assistance, we published a notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the

Federal Register on August 24, 2023,

entitled Expansion of the Rental

Subsidy Policy for Supplemental

Security Income (SSI) Applicants and

Recipients.

In the NPRM, we proposed

to revise our regulations by making the

rental subsidy exception our nationwide

policy. Under the proposed rule, all SSI

applicants and recipients would be held

to the same standard; that is, a

‘‘business arrangement’’ exists, and the

applicant or recipient is not considered

to be receiving ISM in the form of room

or rent, if the applicant or recipient has

a monthly required rent equal to or

exceeding the PMV.

We are making these changes based

on the Commissioner of Social

Security’s rulemaking authority

specified in sections 205(a), 702(a)(5),

1631(d)(1), 1631(e)(1)(A), and 1633(a) of

the Social Security Act. These sections

of the Act give the Commissioner the

authority to adopt rules relating to,

among other things, what data the

Commissioner determines is necessary

for the agency to collect for the effective

and efficient administration of the SSI

program, as well as the nature and

extent of the evidence applicants and

recipients need to provide to establish

benefit eligibility. The modifications to

our policy regarding how we will

determine rental subsidy are a proper

exercise of the Commissioner’s

rulemaking authority under the Act.

The NPRM includes a discussion of

the ISM policy

as well as the rationale

for and analysis of this policy change,

which in this final rule we are adopting

in full. As discussed in the NPRM, the

rationale underlying the exception that

has been in place in the seven excepted

States was based largely on the court

decisions from the Second and Seventh

Circuit Courts of Appeal.

In Jackson,

the Seventh Circuit reasoned that it is

not enough for a claimant to be

provided shelter at a rate below market

value for that difference to be counted

as ‘‘income’’ for SSI purposes; rather, to

be counted as ‘‘income,’’ the difference

between the market value and the

monthly required rent must result in

increased purchasing power to meet an

applicant’s or recipient’s basic needs.

In Ruppert, the Second Circuit similarly

found that the difference between the

market value and the monthly required

rent should constitute an ‘‘actual

economic benefit’’ to be counted as

‘‘income’’ for SSI purposes.

implementing Ruppert for residents of

the Second Circuit, we announced in

our Acquiescence Ruling that an

applicant or recipient does not receive

an ‘‘actual economic benefit’’ from a

rental subsidy when the amount of

monthly required rent equals or exceeds

the PMV.

Thus, applying nationally the

definition of ‘‘business arrangement’’

based on the PMV rather than the CMRV

focuses on the SSI applicant’s or

recipient’s purchasing power or the

actual economic benefit they receive

and ensures that all SSI applicants and

recipients, regardless of where they

reside, will have the same policy

applied to them regarding the definition

of a business arrangement. This policy

change therefore supports our goal of

enhancing equality in the programs we

administer for all applicants and

recipients.

Comment Summary

We solicited comments on the

proposed rule and received 179 public

comments on our NPRM from August

24, 2023, through October 23, 2023. All

comments are available for public

viewing at https://www.regulations.gov/

document/SSA-2023-0010-0001/

comment. These comments were

received from:

•Individuals; and

•Advocacy groups, such as the

National Organization of Social Security

Claimants’ Representatives and the

Consortium for Constituents with

Disabilities.

We carefully considered the public

comments we received. A significant

majority of commenters (170 comments)

supported the policy we proposed in the

NRPM—to extend the rental subsidy

exception nationwide—without

reservation or suggestions for

modifications. Some commenters agreed

with the proposal, but recommended

further amendments to ensure the

greatest number of SSI applicants and

recipients could avail themselves of the

benefits provided by the new policy.

Only one commenter disagreed with the

proposal altogether.

We received several comments

suggesting changes that are not feasible

for us to make or are outside the scope

of the proposed rule and the final rule.

For example, some commenters

recommended changes to the statutorily

set resource limits, and others

recommended that we do away with

counting ISM altogether. Even though

these comments are outside the scope of

the NPRM and final rule, we address

them in a general manner to help the

public better understand the SSI

program. We note that commenters

frequently compared or conflated the

concepts of rental subsidy and rental

liability, which are not the same thing

under our policies. An individual

receives ISM in the form of rental

subsidy when the monthly required rent

(including a flat fee payment) is less

than the amount charged under a

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:36 Apr 10, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM 11APR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

25509

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 71 / Thursday, April 11, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

See POMS SI 00835.380.

Based on the new rule, if the lease presented

by the individual contains all necessary information

(rent charged is higher or equal to the PMV),

contacting the landlord is unnecessary to develop

rental subsidy.

See id.

See id. See also 20 CFR 416.1130(b).

See POMS SI 00835.020; POMS SI 00835.120.

See POMS SI 00835.120A; POMS SI

00835.380B6.

See POMS SI 00835.120A.

When a claimant or couple lives throughout a

month in another person’s household and receives

both food and shelter from others living in the

household, we reduce the applicable FBR by one-

third. This reduction in the FBR has an income

value, known as the VTR or the value of the one-

third reduction. See POMS SI 00835.200A.

See id.

See https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/

eAgendaMain?operation=OPERATION_GET_

AGENCY_RULE_LIST&currentPub=true&

agencyCode=&showStage=active&agency

Cd=0960&csrf_token=3FE7BC5F46AC43624

D85A63227874C0C8BCF6ED346AD43F4DC50FD

05D9B63DC5C7005A531663BBC086DDF17A8

F74A3C016A0.

See https://www.ssa.gov/equity/assets/

materials/2023.pdf.

business arrangement.

We develop for

rental subsidy by contacting the

landlord when necessary

to verify (1)

the monthly required rent (2) and the

reason for accepting a reduced rent, if

that is at issue.

In developing rental

subsidy, we also obtain information

about the CMRV from the landlord or

another knowledgeable source (and will

continue to do so) to determine if the

CMRV is less than the PMV.

In contrast, rental liability is an oral

or written agreement between an

individual (or the individual’s spouse

with whom they live or a person whose

income may be deemed to the

individual) and a landlord that the

landlord will provide shelter in return

for rent.

Rental liability is generally

verified through oral evidence from the

landlord or written evidence of the

rental agreement. Rental liability is

related to the development of an

applicant’s or recipient’s living

arrangement which is necessary to

understand before determining if an

applicant or recipient receives ISM in

the form of a rental subsidy.

Otherwise stated, the establishment of

rental liability must precede a

determination of rental subsidy. When

an applicant or recipient demonstrates

rental liability, we find that they are

living in their own household (not the

household of another).

This

determination, in turn, is central to

whether we apply the value of the one-

third reduction (VTR)

rule or PMV

rule to value any ISM they receive—if

an applicant or recipient is living in

their own household, then the PMV rule

applies to valuing ISM.

In other

words, establishing rental liability is one

of the threshold issues in determining

an applicant’s or recipient’s living

arrangement, which determines whether

we use the VTR rule or PMV rule to

value any ISM received; rental subsidy,

on the other hand, is one type of ISM

that may be applicable and developed

for applicants and recipients who are

not subject to the VTR rule.

Comments and Responses

Category I: Support for the Proposed

Rule With No Request for Further

Changes

Comment: We received 170 comments

from advocacy groups and interested

citizens unreservedly stating their

support for our proposal to apply the

rental subsidy exception nationwide.

These comments did not suggest

modifications to the proposed rule.

Response: We acknowledge and

appreciate the support for the proposal.

Comment: Of note, many of these 170

commenters opined that adoption of the

proposed rule would simplify the SSI

program, advance equity, and promote

uniform treatment of rental assistance

for SSI recipients.

Response: As we expressed in the

NPRM, these three outcomes were our

primary aims in developing this

rulemaking. Accordingly, we appreciate

that many commenters also highlighted

them as benefits of the rule.

Comment: Multiple commenters

identified administrative efficiencies

associated with the adoption of the

proposed rule. For example, several

commenters expressed that the rule

would save SSA staff time, time which,

in the words of one commenter, could

be used to ‘‘run the SSI program better.’’

Other commenters opined on the overall

positive effect the rule would have on

the administrative efficiency of our

programs.

Response: Since the rule will result in

nationwide uniformity and require less

information from some SSI applicants

and recipients, we agree that, after an

initial implementation period, it will

increase administrative efficiency.

Comment: Many commenters urged

us to move quickly to finalize and

implement the regulation. They further

indicated support for our efforts to

update our ‘‘financial rules’’ in other

ways that benefit disabled people and

older adults.

Response: We are finalizing this rule

and will implement it on the date

specified herein. Also, as indicated by

our Fall 2023 Unified Agenda,

we are

contemplating other regulatory actions

aimed at benefiting vulnerable

populations.

Category II: Opposition to the Rule

Comment: We received one comment

opposing any changes in SSI, including

this rule, because, per the commenter, a

change in SSI would ‘‘be a hardship for

my family.’’

Response: The commenter did not

explain specifically why they perceived

that changes to the SSI program would

be a hardship. Nonetheless, we note that

the change will not decrease payment

amounts for any individuals and might

increase payment amounts for some

individuals. Also, we expect the change

to be simpler to understand and reduce

burden for individuals reporting

information.

Category III: Support for the Proposed

Rule, But With Request for Additional

Changes

Comment: Another commenter wrote

that they ‘‘believe that ISM rules

disproportionately penalize people of

color, including refugees and other

recent immigrants.’’

Response: SSA administers the

nation’s largest social welfare programs,

including the SSI program that is

designed to lift millions out of poverty.

Our vision is to provide income security

for the diverse populations we serve,

including those in underserved

communities, people with disabilities,

workers, their families, and people who

communicate primarily in languages

other than English, as laid out in Social

Security’s Equity Action Plan 2023

Update.

Our intent is to serve all who

apply for and all who are eligible for SSI

payments, and apply our rules equally

to all SSI applicants and recipients. To

the extent the commenter believes ISM

should be eliminated from the SSI

program, that change would require

Congressional action.

Comment: Multiple commenters

opined on our already-existing rental-

liability evidentiary requirements,

which are laid out in our POMS

instructions. One commenter

recommended that we accept SSI

applicants’ and recipients’ self-

attestations regarding rental agreements

rather than requiring formal rental

agreement documentation that we then

verify. Similarly, multiple commenters

recommended that we not require

written verification of a rental

agreement because they find many

agreements to be oral in nature, and it

can be difficult to compel landlords to

cooperate with the verification process.

In that vein, many commenters

encouraged us to ‘‘follow the lead’’ of

the USDA Food and Nutrition Service,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:36 Apr 10, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM 11APR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

25510

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 71 / Thursday, April 11, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

‘‘Deeming’’ is the process of considering one

person’s income to be counted as another person’s

(in this case, the SSI applicant’s or recipient’s)

income as well. There are four categories of

deemors: (1) ineligible spouse; (2) ineligible parent;

(3) sponsor of an alien; and (4) essential person, as

defined in 20 CFR 416.222. See https://

www.ecfr.gov/current/title-20/chapter-III/part-416/

subpart-K/subject-group-ECFRdaeb44ef4120053/

section-416.1160.

See POMS SI 00835.120C.

See POMS SI 00835.120A.

See POMS SI 00835.120D.

See 7 CFR 273.2(f)(1)(vi); 7 CFR 273.3.

See 7 CFR 273.2(f)(1)(x).

See 7 CFR 273.2(f)(4)(i) and (ii).

See POMS SI 00835.380C.

See POMS SI 00835.120.

HUD compiles and lists Fair Market Rents

(FMR). FMRs are statistics developed by HUD to

determine payments for housing assistance

programs like the Section 8 housing choice voucher

program. For more information, please see: https://

www.hud.loans/hud-loans-blog/what-is-fair-market-

rent/.

which, according to the commenters,

does not require written verification of

rent for those applying specifically for

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance

Program (SNAP) benefits. In contrast,

one commenter asserted that our

proposed rule would not work unless

individuals were still required to report

proof of their rental payments.

Response: As discussed above, rental

liability and rental subsidy are two

distinct policies. Rental liability relates

to determining an applicant’s or

recipient’s living arrangement and

whether they have demonstrated that

they live in their own household (and

are subject to the PMV rule) or in the

household of another (and potentially

subject to the VTR rule). Rental subsidy,

on the other hand, is a type of ISM that

may be applicable depending on an

applicant’s or recipient’s circumstances.

Regarding the comments on our

development criteria for rental liability,

we acknowledge the diverse viewpoints

on our existing requirements. We note

that we do accept statements from an

applicant or recipient to establish rental

liability in some circumstances—if the

individual lives alone or if the only

other household members are the

spouse, a deemor,

or a child.

discussed above, the purpose of

verifying rental liability is to establish

whether an applicant or recipient is

living in their own household or the

household of another (as this affects

whether they are subject to the PMV

rule or the VTR rule).

If an applicant

or recipient lives alone (or only with

their spouse, deemor, or any child), they

live in their own household, not the

household of another. However, per our

current POMS policy, if the applicant or

recipient lives with others, then we

need additional evidence of rental

liability to verify that they are not living

in another person’s household (and

potentially subject to the VTR rule).

Because the living arrangement

determination is critical to how we

value an applicant’s or recipient’s ISM,

we currently do not accept self-

attestations when it is not already clear

from the individual’s circumstances that

they are living in their own household.

As for the possibility of oral rental

agreements, we note that our existing

rental liability verification does not

require written evidence of all rental

agreements. For example, we accept

verbal confirmation from a landlord of

a rental agreement or submission of rent

receipts to establish rental liability, as

long as the rent receipts satisfy certain

criteria.

Regarding the comments on the FNS

policies for implementing their SNAP

program, we note that the eligibility

requirements for SSI and SNAP are not

the same. Thus, it is difficult to compare

point-for-point the eligibility and

verification requirements for the two

programs. For example, as discussed

above, a critical factor that we need to

determine for SSI purposes is whether

an applicant or recipient is living in

their own household or another person’s

household, as that affects whether we

use the PMV rule or the VTR rule to

value the individual’s ISM. Our rental

liability policy is designed to ensure we

get the information we need to verify

whether an applicant or recipient is

living in their own household or the

household of another person. In

contrast, for example, there are SNAP

requirements that appear to be more

focused on verifying State residency,

which is a factor more important for

SNAP eligibility.

We note that SNAP

applicants and recipients must also

verify ‘‘factors affecting the composition

of a household, if questionable;’’ and

applicants ‘‘who claim to be a separate

household from those with whom they

reside shall be responsible for proving

that they are a separate household to the

satisfaction of the State agency.’’

While the SNAP regulations do not

appear to specify the type of evidence

required for every eligibility factor, we

note that documentation such as ‘‘rent

receipts’’ and contacts with collateral

sources such as ‘‘landlords’’ are

included in the examples of ‘‘sources of

verification’’ for SNAP eligibility

requirements as well.

Overall, because

of the differences between the programs,

we are not adopting the same

development processes that FNS uses to

determine and verify the eligibility

requirements for SNAP.

Finally, as to the commenter’s

statement that our rental subsidy rule

‘‘would not work unless individuals

were still required to report proof of

their rental payments,’’ we agree that we

will continue to require information

about applicants’ and recipients’

monthly required rent for the purposes

of calculating rental subsidy ISM, when

it applies.

Comment: Many commenters

recommended that we accept proof of

rent regardless of the format (e.g.,

money order copies, cancelled checks,

and proof of electronic payments) for

purposes of rental liability verification.

Response: The NPRM and this final

rule address only the definition of a

business arrangement in the context of

rental subsidy—not the development

criteria for establishing rental liability

for purposes of determining an

applicant’s or recipient’s living

arrangement. This rule does not address

the evidentiary requirements associated

with developing rental subsidy or rental

liability, and, in fact, all current

requirements are contained exclusively

in our POMS. In addition, under this

rule, we do not require submission of

rent receipts—to make a rental subsidy

determination, we can obtain verbal

verification from the landlord of the

monthly required rent.

However, we note that under our

current rental liability policy, we accept

electronic payments, such as rent

receipts, if they satisfy all of the criteria

that we believe are necessary to

adequately document rental liability. To

establish rental liability, a rent receipt

needs to contain the following: the

individual’s name, amount paid, period

covered by payment, and the signature

of the landlord or authorized

representative.

We require this

information for rent receipts because it

enables us to confirm that the payment

being made is for the individual’s

monthly required rent and provides

sufficient information to establish a

rental agreement between the individual

and the landlord. Electronic payments

(such as Zelle, Venmo, and PayPal) may

not always satisfy the criteria. For

example, these electronic payment

receipts may not indicate the period

covered by the payment.

Comment: One commenter

recommended that we consider using

the U.S. Department of Housing and

Urban Development’s (HUD) fair market

rent data set

to establish market

prices.

Response: We considered the

recommendation but decided not to

adopt it at this time. The HUD fair

market rent data set might be considered

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:36 Apr 10, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM 11APR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

25511

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 71 / Thursday, April 11, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

See id.

Omitting Food From In-Kind Support and

Maintenance Calculations, 89 FR 21199 (March 27,

2024).

See 88 FR 57912–13.

See POMS SI 00835.120C.

See POMS SI 00835.120A4 & 00835.120E.

See POMS SI 00835.120A4.

See POMS SI 00835.120E.

a knowledgeable source for the purpose

of establishing the CMRV for the

applicant’s or recipient’s rental

property.

However, there would be

advantages and disadvantages. For

example, on one hand, information

provided by a government agency

generally is reliable, and it would be

helpful to have another knowledgeable

source from which to obtain relevant

evidence—though, under this final rule,

we will develop CMRV in the rental-

subsidy context only for the limited

purpose of ensuring that it is not less

than the PMV, which we expect will be

rare. On the other hand, due to the input

requirements for the HUD database,

utilizing the HUD fair market rent data

set would require technicians to obtain

more information from the SSI applicant

or recipient—such as the number of

rooms or square footage of the rental

unit—which may not be readily

available and is not otherwise required

for SSI purposes. Therefore, instead of

simplifying the development process,

using the HUD database would add

another layer of development that could

be burdensome to the SSI applicant or

recipient and cause a delay in the case

being processed. We believe that those

disadvantages outweigh the apparent

advantages, and so we decided not to

adopt the recommendation at this time.

Category IV: Comments Relating to ISM,

but Outside the Scope of This Rule

Comment: One commenter suggested

that SSA could use the Supplemental

Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)

standard allotment, based on family

size, to determine if the amount paid for

food is at market value.

Response: These comments are

beyond the scope of the NPRM and final

rule, as they relate to food, and the

NPRM and final rule relate to rent. We

note, however, that we recently

published a final rule relating to the

food element of ISM

which addresses

the relevant comments that were

submitted in response to the associated

NPRM.

Comment: Many commenters

encouraged us to ensure the rental

subsidy policy extends to all SSI

recipients who pay at least the PMV

towards their monthly required rent.

Response: When we apply our rental

subsidy policy, all SSI applicants and

recipients who pay a monthly required

rent, under a rental agreement, equaling

or exceeding the PMV will receive the

benefit of this rule (or at least will not

be disadvantaged by it). As we

discussed in the NPRM, one of our goals

in implementing this rule is to bring

nationwide uniformity to the

application of our rental subsidy

policy.

Comment: Many commenters opined

that we should revise our sub-regulatory

guidance related to rental liability and

simplify rental liability determinations

‘‘to maximize the simplification effects

of the rental subsidy rule.’’ Specifically,

they suggested that we streamline our

rental liability policy, particularly for

applicants and recipients who ‘‘rent

from someone with whom they live’’

because ‘‘SSI recipients who live in the

same residence as their landlord must

first establish rental liability before the

proposed rental subsidy rule would

apply.’’

Response: As we noted at the outset

of the comment section, simplifying the

rental liability determination is separate

from the new rental subsidy policy (or

ensuring that it extends to all SSI

applicants and recipients who pay at

least the PMV). Specifically, the

commenters recommend we revise our

pertinent guidance to find, ‘‘without

additional development, that rental

liability (emphasis added) exists’’ for an

applicant or recipient who rents from

someone with whom they live ‘‘unless

the landlord is a parent or child’’ of the

applicant or recipient. However, this

recommendation concerns our

determinations about an individual’s

living arrangement and whether an

individual has rental liability—not our

rental subsidy policy, which was the

intended subject of this rulemaking.

Under our current POMS instructions,

in certain circumstances we can rely on

self-allegation of rental liability by the

applicant or recipient consistent with

commenters’ suggestions, which we

refer to in a process called ‘‘curtailed

development.’’ Under curtailed

development, we accept an individual’s

statement of rental liability in limited

circumstances where it is otherwise

already clear that they live in their own

household, such as when an applicant

or recipient lives alone.

However, we

acknowledge that in most other

circumstances we currently require

additional evidence of rental liability,

and we will consider commenters’

feedback again if we make changes to

our rental liability POMS in the future.

Comment: One commenter urged us

to ‘‘modernize the processes and

systems used to make ISM

determinations and calculations.’’

Response: We will make the necessary

systems changes to implement the final

rule.

Comment: Several commenters

suggested that when SSI recipients rent

from someone with whom they live,

SSA should find, without any

additional development, that rental

liability exists unless SSA has evidence

to the contrary, or the landlord is a

parent or child of the SSI recipient.

Response: It appears that the

commenter is suggesting we accept the

applicant’s or recipient’s allegation of

rental liability without more

development. However, when an

applicant or recipient alleges that they

are renting from someone with whom

they live, under our current POMS

instructions we consider this to be a

‘‘room rental’’ situation and must

determine whether the applicant or

recipient is in a ‘‘separate household’’

from the person from whom they are

renting a room.

A ‘‘separate

household’’ (within one home) is one

that functions as a separate economic

unit—if the applicant or recipient and

the landlord do not function as separate

economic units, the applicant or

recipient is not considered to be living

in a separate household, cannot have

rental liability, and may be subject to

the VTR rule.

Again, this distinction is

important because whether an applicant

or recipient is living in their own

(separate) household or in another

person’s household will affect whether

the VTR rule or the PMV rule applies in

valuing their ISM. When an applicant or

recipient is living with the person from

whom they rent (i.e., renting a room),

under our current rental liability policy

we obtain information sufficient to

enable us to verify and make an accurate

determination regarding the individual’s

living arrangement, such as contacting

the landlord and obtaining information

about the household organization, rent,

meals, and access to the property.

Comment: Several commenters

recommended that we update the rules

applicable to the Value of the One-Third

Reduction (VTR). They suggested that

we should consider that if an SSI

recipient spends more than one-third of

their benefits on shelter costs, the

recipient should not be subject to ISM

reductions. They further stated that the

NPRM as written did not affect those

who live in another person’s household

and receive both food and shelter from

within that household (that is, those

currently subject to ISM under the VTR

rule).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:36 Apr 10, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM 11APR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

25512

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 71 / Thursday, April 11, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

42 U.S.C. 1382a(a)(2)(A).

The commenter seemed to be referencing the

policy found at https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/

0500835482. Again, this is outside the scope of the

current rulemaking.

See 42 U.S.C. 1382a(a)(2)(A).

See 42 U.S.C. 1382(a)(3)(A) & (a)(3)(B).

Implementation of this final rule will cause the

ISM amount charged to some individuals to

decrease. If such individuals are already receiving

an SSI payment under current rules, their SSI

payment will increase. Individuals whose ISM

under current rules causes them to be ineligible for

SSI because of excess income may become eligible

under this final rule, assuming they meet all other

eligibility criteria.

Response: This comment is outside

the scope of the NPRM and final rule.

We note that the VTR is established in

the Social Security Act.

Comment: One commenter

recommended that we educate

beneficiaries and the public on the new

rules and instruct field office staff to

help individuals secure the benefits of

the new rule.

Response: Prior to implementation,

we will provide our front-line

technicians with training and policy

updates that state the new rule and

instructions for administering the

change. In addition, we are working on

updating publicly accessible POMS

instructions, publications, and forms.

Comment: One commenter opined

that we should revise our policies on

assessing ISM when calculating back

awards. Specifically, the commenter

expressed that we should never deduct

ISM from back payments we calculate,

because even people who provide food

and shelter on a non-loan basis probably

expect that they will be paid back once

the claimant is awarded back payments.

The commenter asserted that we should

make this policy change via rulemaking

and update our regulations, sub-

regulatory guidance, and associated

paperwork to apply this new policy.

Response: This commenter is asking

us to revise our past ISM loan policy,

and this is outside the scope of the

current rulemaking.

Comment: Several commenters

encouraged us to go further and

eliminate the ISM deduction altogether,

because, in the view of these

commenters, it unfairly penalizes

people with disabilities for getting help

obtaining shelter when they are already

struggling to meet their basic needs on

an insufficient income.

Response: The elimination of ISM

from the SSI program would require

Congressional action to change existing

statutory law because ISM is established

in the Social Security Act.

Therefore,

the comment is outside the scope of the

NPRM and final rule.

Commenter: The same commenter

opined that, if ISM is not abolished

altogether, it should only be used in

cases where an equivalent market-based

price is practicable to establish.

Response: See our response directly

preceding this comment. Any such

change would require Congressional

action to amend existing statutory law.

Comment: Several commenters

opined that we must increase resource

and asset limits for individuals and

couples.

Response: This recommendation is

outside the scope of the proposed rule

and the final rule, and Congressional

action would be required to change the

existing statutory law.

Regulatory Procedures

Executive Order 12866, as

Supplemented by Executive Order

13563 and Executive Order 14094

We consulted with the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB), and

OMB determined that this final rule

meets the criteria for a significant

regulatory action under Executive Order

12866, as supplemented by Executive

Order 13563 and Executive Order

14094. Therefore, OMB reviewed it.

Anticipated Transfers to Our Program

Our Office of the Chief Actuary

estimates that implementation of this

final rule would result in a total

increase in Federal SSI payments of

$837 million over fiscal years 2024

through 2033, assuming implementation

of this rule on September 30, 2024.

These transfers reflect an estimation that

approximately 41,000 individuals who

would be eligible under our current

rules will have their Federal SSI

payment increased by an average of

$132 per month in 2024 attributable to

implementation of this rule. There

would also be an annual average of an

additional 14,000 individuals from

fiscal year 2024 through 2033 who are

not eligible under current rules who

would be newly eligible and would

receive payments under the final rule.

Anticipated Net Administrative Cost

Savings to the Social Security

Administration

Our Office of Budget, Finance, and

Management estimates that this

regulation will result in net

administrative savings of $10 million for

the 10-year period from FY 2024 to FY

2033. The net administrative savings are

mainly a result of unit time savings as

field office employees will not have to

spend time developing CMRV for all

rental subsidy calculations during

initial claims, pre-effectuation reviews,

redeterminations, and post-eligibility

actions. The savings are offset by costs

to update our systems, costs to send

notices to inform current recipients of

the policy changes, costs to address

inquiries from the notices, and costs

because of more individuals being

eligible for SSI benefits, which increases

claims, reconsiderations, appeals,

redeterminations, and post-eligibility

actions.

Anticipated Time-Savings and

Qualitative Benefits to the Public

We anticipate the following

qualitative benefits generated from this

policy:

•Saving time and effort for claimants

and third parties who may have

evidence related to a claimant’s

application because they would need to

submit less information. We estimate at

a minimum that this will result in more

than 7,000 hours of time saved in

annual reduced paperwork burden,

representing an opportunity cost of

$1,140,526 (see the Paperwork

Reduction Act section of the preamble

below for specifics).

•Potentially get faster determinations

or decisions regarding SSI eligibility,

payment amount, or both, which would

have both quantitative effects

financially and qualitatively may

alleviate stress for applicants and

recipients associated with the length of

time it may take to obtain SSI.

•Administratively easier to apply the

same policy nationwide.

Anticipated Qualitative Costs

We do not anticipate more than de

minimis costs associated with this

rulemaking. We do not anticipate that

this final rule would affect labor market

participation in any significant way, in

part because of the limited

understanding of the current policy in

the SSI applicant and recipient

community.

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 meeting the

criteria in 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

We analyzed this final rule in

accordance with the principles and

criteria established by Executive Order

13132 and determined that this final

rule will not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a federalism assessment. We also

determined that this final rule will not

preempt any State law or State

regulation or affect the States’ abilities

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:36 Apr 10, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM 11APR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

25513

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 71 / Thursday, April 11, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

to discharge traditional State

governmental functions.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

We certify that this final rule will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities

because it affects individuals only.

Therefore, a regulatory flexibility

analysis is not required under the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This final rule does not require any

new collections or revisions to existing

collections. However, we anticipate the

application of the revisions based on

this rule will cause a burden change to

our currently approved information

collections under the following

information collection requests: 0960–

0174, the SSA–8006, Statement of

Living Arrangements, In-Kind Support

and Maintenance; and 0960–0454, the

SSA–L5061, Letter to Landlord

Requesting Rental Information. Based

on our current management information

data from the seven states currently

implementing these changes, we

anticipate these changes will allow for

verbal responses from landlords in place

of the current form in some situations,

thus reducing the overall burden as SSA

will not require those respondents to

complete the entirety of Form SSA–

L5061. In addition, we note that for

those who use the paper form, we will

send a revised version with question #5

removed. We also anticipate a slight

burden reduction to Form SSA–8006, as

the respondents may not need to

provide as much detail pertaining to

their rental subsidy agreement due to

the proposed rule.

We published a notice of proposed

rulemaking on August 24, 2023, at 88

FR 75910. In that NPRM, we solicited

comments under the Paperwork

Reduction Act (PRA) on the burden

estimate; the need for the information;

its practical utility; ways to enhance its

quality, utility, and clarity; and on ways

to minimize the burden on respondents,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology. The comments

section above includes our responses to

the PRA-related public comments we

received under the NPRM.

The following chart shows the time

burden information associated with the

final rule:

OMB #; Form # Number of

respondents

Frequency

response

Current

average

burden per

response

(minutes)

Current

estimated

total burden

(hours)

Anticipated

new burden

per

response

under

regulation

(minutes)

Anticipated

estimated

total burden

under

regulation

(hours)

Estimated

burden

savings

(hours)

0960–0174 SSA–8006 (Paper Form) ....................................... 12,160 1 7 1,419 6 1,216 203

0960–0174 SSA–8006 (SSI Claims System) ........................... 109,436 1 7 12,768 6 10,944 1,824

0960–0454 SSA–L5061 (Paper Form) ..................................... 35,640 1 10 5,940 8 4,752 1,188

0960–0454 SSA–L5061 (Phone Call) ....................................... 35,640 1 10 5,940 3 1,782 4,158

Totals ................................................................................. 192,876 .................... .................... 26,067 .................... 18,694 7,373

The following chart shows the

theoretical cost burdens associated with

the final rule:

OMB #; Form # Number of

respondents

Anticipated

estimated

total burden

under

regulation from

chart above

(hours)

Average

theoretical

hourly cost

amount

(dollars) *

Average

combined wait

time in field

office and/or

teleservice

centers

(minutes) **

Total annual

opportunity

cost

(dollars) ***

0960–0174 SSA–8006 (Paper Form) .................................. 12,160 1,216 * $13.30 ** 19 *** $67,391

0960–0174 SSA–8006 (SSI Claims System) ...................... 109,436 10,944 *13.30 ** 24 ***727,749

0960–0454 SSA–L5061 (Paper Form) ................................ 35,640 4,752 *31.48 ** 24 ***598,372

0960–0454 SSA–L5061 (Phone Call) ................................. 35,640 1,782 *31.48 ........................ ***56,097

Totals ............................................................................ 192,876 18,694 ........................ ........................ *** 1,449,609

* We based this figure on the average disability insurance (DI) payments based on SSA’s current FY 2024 data (2024FactSheet.pdf (ssa.gov));

on the average U.S. citizen’s hourly salary, as reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics data (https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm).

** We based this figure on the average FY 2024 wait times for field offices and hearings office, as well as by averaging both the average FY

2024 wait times for field offices and teleservice centers, based on SSA’s current management information data.

*** This figure does not represent actual costs that SSA is imposing on recipients of Social Security payments to complete this application;

rather, these are theoretical opportunity costs for the additional time respondents will spend to complete the application. There is no actual

charge to respondents to complete the application.

SSA submitted a single new

Information Collection Request which

encompasses the revisions to both

information collections (currently under

OMB Numbers 0960–0174, and 0960–

0454) to OMB for the approval of the

changes due to the final rule. After

approval of this information collection,

we will adjust the figures associated

with the current OMB numbers for these

forms to reflect the new burden.

As we have revised the associated

burdens for the above-mentioned forms

since we made revisions to the final rule

which were not included at the NPRM

stage, we are currently soliciting

comment on the burden for the forms as

shown in the charts above. If you would

like to submit comments, please send

them to the following locations:

Office of Management and Budget, Attn:

Desk Officer for SSA, Fax Number:

202–395–6974

Social Security Administration, OLCA,

Attn: Reports Clearance Director, 3100

West High Rise, 6401 Security Blvd.,

Baltimore, MD 21235, Fax: 410–966–

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:36 Apr 10, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM 11APR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

25514

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 71 / Thursday, April 11, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

28 CFR 0.100.

Those four other substances, [butonitazene,

flunitazene, metodesnitazene, metonitazene], will

not be discussed further in this final order.

Schedules of Controlled Substances: Temporary

Placement of Butonitazene, Etodesnitazene,

flunitazene, Metodesnitazene, Metonitazene, N-

Pyrrolidino etonitazene, and Protonitazene in

Schedule I, 87 FR 21556 (Apr. 12, 2022).

2830, Email address:

OR.Reports.Clearance@ssa.gov

You can submit comments until May

13, 2024, which is 30 days after the

publication of this document. To receive

a copy of the OMB clearance package,

contact the SSA Reports Clearance

Officer using any of the above contact

methods. We prefer to receive

comments by email or fax.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Programs No 96.006 Supplemental

Security Income)

List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 416

Administrative practice and

procedure, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Supplemental Security

Income (SSI).

The Commissioner of Social Security,

Martin O’Malley, having reviewed and

approved this document, is delegating

the authority to electronically sign this

document to Faye I. Lipsky, who is the

primary Federal Register Liaison for

SSA, for purposes of publication in the

Federal Register.

Faye I. Lipsky,

Federal Register Liaison, Office of Legislation

and Congressional Affairs, Social Security

Administration.

For the reasons stated in the

preamble, we amend 20 CFR part 416 as

set forth below:

PART 416—SUPPLEMENTAL

SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED,

BLIND, AND DISABLED

Subpart K—Income

■1. The authority citation for subpart K

of part 416 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 902(a)(5), 1381a,

1382, 1382a, 1382b, 1382c(f), 1382j, 1383,

and 1383b; sec. 211, Pub. L. 93–66, 87 Stat.

154 (42 U.S.C. 1382 note).

■2. In § 416.1130, revise paragraph

(b)(1) to read as follows:

§ 416.1130 Introduction.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(1) We calculate in-kind support and

maintenance considering any shelter

that is given to you or that you receive

because someone else pays for it.

Shelter includes room, rent, mortgage

payments, real property taxes, heating

fuel, gas, electricity, water, sewerage,

and garbage collection services. You are

not receiving in-kind support and

maintenance in the form of room or rent

if you are paying the amount charged

under a business arrangement. A

business arrangement exists when the

amount of monthly required rent to be

paid equals or exceeds the presumed

maximum value described in

§ 416.1140(a)(1). If the required amount

of rent is less than the presumed

maximum value, we will impute as in-

kind support and maintenance the

difference between the required amount

of rent and either the presumed

maximum value or the current market

rental value (see § 416.1101), whichever

is less. In addition, cash payments to

uniformed service members as

allowances for on-base housing or

privatized military housing are in-kind

support and maintenance.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2024–07675 Filed 4–10–24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

21 CFR Part 1308

[Docket No. DEA–900]

Schedules of Controlled Substances:

Placement of Etodesnitazene, N-

Pyrrolidino Etonitazene, and

Protonitazene in Schedule I

AGENCY

: Drug Enforcement

Administration, Department of Justice.

ACTION

: Final amendment; final order.

SUMMARY

: With the issuance of this final

order, the Administrator of the Drug

Enforcement Administration is

permanently placing 2-(2-(4-

ethoxybenzyl)-1H-benzimidazol-1-yl)-

N,N-diethylethan-1-amine (other names:

etodesnitazene; etazene), 2-(4-

ethoxybenzyl)-5-nitro-1-(2-(pyrrolidin-1-

yl)ethyl)-1H-benzimidazole (other

names: N-pyrrolidino etonitazene;

etonitazepyne), and N,N-diethyl-2-(5-

nitro-2-(4-propoxybenzyl)-1H-

benzimidazol-1-yl)ethan-1-amine (other

name: protonitazene), including their

isomers, esters, ethers, salts, and salts of

isomers, esters, and ethers whenever the

existence of such isomers, esters, ethers,

and salts are possible within the specific

chemical designation, in schedule I of

the Controlled Substances Act. This

scheduling action discharges the United

States’ obligations under the Single

Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961).

This action imposes permanent

regulatory controls and administrative,

civil, and criminal sanctions applicable

to schedule I controlled substances on

persons who handle (manufacture,

distribute, import, export, engage in

research or conduct instructional

activities with, or possess), or handle

etodesnitazene, N-pyrrolidino

etonitazene, and protonitazene.

DATES

: Effective April 11, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

: Dr.

Terrence L. Boos, Drug and Chemical

Evaluation Section, Diversion Control

Division, Drug Enforcement

Administration; Telephone: (571) 362–

3249.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Legal Authority

The United States is a party to the

United Nations Single Convention on

Narcotic Drugs, Mar. 30, 1961, 18 U.S.T.

1407, 520 U.N.T.S. 151 (Single

Convention), as amended by the 1972

Protocol. Article 3, paragraph 7 of the

Single Convention requires that if the

Commission on Narcotic Drugs

(Commission) adds a substance to one of

the schedules of such Convention, and

the United States receives notification of

such scheduling decision from the

Secretary-General of the United Nations

(Secretary-General), the United States,

as a signatory Member State, is obligated

to control the substance under its

national drug control legislation. Under

21 U.S.C. 811(d)(1) of the Controlled

Substances Act (CSA), if control of a

substance is required ‘‘by United States

obligations under international treaties,

conventions, or protocols in effect on

October 27, 1970,’’ the Attorney General

must issue an order controlling such

drug under the schedule he deems most

appropriate to carry out such

obligations, without regard to the

findings required by 21 U.S.C. 811(a) or

812(b), and without regard to the

procedures prescribed by 21 U.S.C.

811(a) and (b). The Attorney General has

delegated scheduling authority under 21

U.S.C. 811 to the Administrator of the

Drug Enforcement Administration

(DEA).

Background

On April 12, 2022, DEA issued a

temporary scheduling order, placing

etodesnitazene, N-pyrrolidino

etonitazene, and protonitazene, along

with four other substances,

temporarily

in schedule I of the Controlled

Substances Act (CSA).

That order for

etodesnitazene, N-pyrrolidino

etonitazene, and protonitazene (codified

at 21 CFR 1308.11(h)(51), (55), and (56))

was based on findings by the

Administrator that the temporary

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:36 Apr 10, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM 11APR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Subscribers can access the reported version of this case.

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Request your trial

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
Thousands of Data Sources

Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
Find What You Need, Quickly

Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
Over 2 million registered users

Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.

Subscribers are able to see a list of all the cited cases and legislation of a document.

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Request your trial

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
Thousands of Data Sources

Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
Find What You Need, Quickly

Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
Over 2 million registered users

Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.

Subscribers are able to see a list of all the documents that have cited the case.

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Request your trial

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
Thousands of Data Sources

Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
Find What You Need, Quickly

Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
Over 2 million registered users

Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.

Subscribers are able to see the revised versions of legislation with amendments.

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Request your trial

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
Thousands of Data Sources

Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
Find What You Need, Quickly

Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
Over 2 million registered users

Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.

Subscribers are able to see any amendments made to the case.

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Request your trial

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
Thousands of Data Sources

Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
Find What You Need, Quickly

Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
Over 2 million registered users

Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.

Subscribers are able to see a visualisation of a case and its relationships to other cases. An alternative to lists of cases, the Precedent Map makes it easier to establish which ones may be of most relevance to your research and prioritise further reading. You also get a useful overview of how the case was received.

Request your trial

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
Thousands of Data Sources

Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
Find What You Need, Quickly

Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
Over 2 million registered users

Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.

Subscribers are able to see the list of results connected to your document through the topics and citations Vincent found.

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Request your trial

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
Thousands of Data Sources

Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
Find What You Need, Quickly

Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
Over 2 million registered users

Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.

Expansion of the Rental Subsidy Policy for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Applicants and Recipients

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Thousands of Data Sources

Find What You Need, Quickly

Over 2 million registered users

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Thousands of Data Sources

Find What You Need, Quickly

Over 2 million registered users

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Thousands of Data Sources

Find What You Need, Quickly

Over 2 million registered users

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Thousands of Data Sources

Find What You Need, Quickly

Over 2 million registered users

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Thousands of Data Sources

Find What You Need, Quickly

Over 2 million registered users

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Thousands of Data Sources

Find What You Need, Quickly

Over 2 million registered users

You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Why Sign-up to vLex?

Over 100 Countries

Thousands of Data Sources

Find What You Need, Quickly

Over 2 million registered users