Rule2026-18337
Simplified Geographic Preference Procurement in Child Nutrition Programs
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 9, 2026
Effective
November 9, 2026
Issuing agencies
Agriculture DepartmentFood and Nutrition Administration
Abstract
This direct final rule amends geographic preference option language in National School Lunch Program, School Breakfast Program, Special Milk Program for Children, Child and Adult Care Program, and Summer Food Service Program regulations. The changes are customer- focused and intended to simplify program regulations and make them easier to understand. They do not change the meaning of the regulations or their implementation.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 173 (Wednesday, September 9, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 173 (Wednesday, September 9, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57245-57249]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-18337]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 9, 2026 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 57245]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Administration
7 CFR Parts 210, 215, 220, 225, and 226
[FNS-2025-0013]
RIN 0584-AF06
Simplified Geographic Preference Procurement in Child Nutrition
Programs
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Administration (FNA), Department of
Agriculture (USDA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This direct final rule amends geographic preference option
language in National School Lunch Program, School Breakfast Program,
Special Milk Program for Children, Child and Adult Care Program, and
Summer Food Service Program regulations. The changes are customer-
focused and intended to simplify program regulations and make them
easier to understand. They do not change the meaning of the regulations
or their implementation.
DATES: This rule will become effective on November 9, 2026, unless the
Department receives written adverse comments on or before October 9,
2026. If written adverse comments within the scope of the rulemaking
are received, the Department will publish timely notification of
withdrawal of this rule or a portion thereof in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: The Food and Nutrition Administration, USDA, invites
interested persons to submit written comments on this direct final
rule. Comments may be submitted in writing by one of the following
methods:
<bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal (preferred): Go to <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
<bullet> Mail: Send comments to Community Food Systems Division,
Food and Nutrition Administration, USDA, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue,
Beltsville, MD 20705.
All written comments submitted in response to this direct 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. FNA will make the written comments
publicly available on the internet via <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Community Food Systems Division, Food
and Nutrition Administration, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Beltsville, MD
20705; telephone: 703-305-2054.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Section I: Background
Purpose of This Direct Final Rule
The National School Lunch Program (NSLP), School Breakfast Program
(SBP), Special Milk Program for Children (SMP), Child and Adult Care
Food Program (CACFP), and Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) are
collectively referred to as the Child Nutrition Programs (CNPs) and
offer opportunities for children across the nation to access
nutritious, well-balanced meals while supporting local farmers and
agriculture. USDA's current geographic preference option regulations
provide flexibilities that CNP operators may use to purchase
unprocessed foods that are locally grown, caught, or raised; this
direct final rule clarifies the existing strategies available through
the geographic preference option. This direct final rule reflects
Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins' February 2025 commitments to
clarify statutory, regulatory, and administrative requirements; create
new opportunities to connect America's farmers to nutrition assistance
programs; and strengthen strategies to encourage healthy choices,
healthy outcomes, and healthy families.\1\ The changes in this direct
final rule do not alter the meaning of the regulations or their
implementation; rather, they are intended to clarify existing
regulatory requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Secretary Rollins' Vision for the Department's 16 Nutrition
Programs (February 13, 2025). Available at: <a href="https://www.fns.usda.gov/rollins-statement-nutrition-programs">https://www.fns.usda.gov/rollins-statement-nutrition-programs</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA expects that clearer regulations will help CNP operators use
the geographic preference option, resulting in the procurement of more
local, unprocessed agricultural products in CNP meals and snacks. This
will also support the Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy Report,
which emphasizes the need to improve access to whole, healthy foods in
government-funded nutrition programs and ensure the availability of
nutritious food for populations in need.\2\ Furthermore, this
clarification will help local agricultural producers, food vendors, and
food processors--many of them small businesses--by increasing market
opportunities and sales to CNP operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Make America Healthy Again. Commission. Strategy Report:
Make Our Children Healthy Again. Available at <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/The-MAHA-Strategy-WH.pdf">https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/The-MAHA-Strategy-WH.pdf</a> page 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statutory Authority
Section 4302 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008
(Pub. L. 110-246) amended the National School Lunch Act to direct the
Secretary of Agriculture to encourage institutions operating child
nutrition programs to purchase unprocessed, locally grown and locally
raised agricultural products.\3\ Effective October 1, 2008,
institutions receiving funds through the child nutrition programs could
apply an optional geographic preference for the procurement of
unprocessed, locally grown or locally raised agricultural products.
This provision applies to institutions operating any of the child
nutrition programs, including the NSLP, SBP, SMP, Fresh Fruit and
Vegetable Program, CACFP, and SFSP, as well as to purchases made for
these programs by the USDA Department of Defense Fresh Fruit and
Vegetable Program. The provision also applies to State agencies making
purchases on behalf of any of the aforementioned child nutrition
program operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-
246). June 18, 2008. Available at: <a href="https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ246/PLAW-110publ246.pdf">https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ246/PLAW-110publ246.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of the Direct Final Rule
With this direct final rule, USDA is clarifying the geographic
preference option regulations revised by the 2024
[[Page 57246]]
final rule titled, Child Nutrition Programs: Meal Patterns Consistent
With the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (the ``2024
rule'').\4\ The 2024 rule expanded the scope of the geographic
preference option by allowing CNP operators to use local (e.g.,
``locally grown,'' ``locally raised,'' or ``locally caught'') as a
procurement specification (i.e., the written description of a product
or service that a vendor must meet to be considered responsive to a
solicitation) in addition to using geography as a preference or
``selection criteria,'' as already allowed in solicitations for
unprocessed agricultural products purchased for CNP meals and snacks.
Prior to the 2024 rule, CNP operators were only allowed to apply local
as a preference, now known as a defined scoring advantage. A defined
scoring advantage allows CNP operators to preference local products by
awarding additional credits or points to unprocessed agricultural
products that are locally grown, caught, or raised, during the
evaluation of responses to a solicitation. With the 2024 rule, CNP
operators may use both geographic preference option strategies:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Child Nutrition Programs: Meal Patterns Consistent With the
2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (89 FR 31962, April 25,
2024). Available at: <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/25/2024-08098/child-nutrition-programs-meal-patterns-consistent-with-the-2020-2025-dietary-guidelines-for">https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/25/2024-08098/child-nutrition-programs-meal-patterns-consistent-with-the-2020-2025-dietary-guidelines-for</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> Using local as a procurement specification; and/or
<bullet> Applying a defined scoring advantage.
The 2024 rule regulatory language maintained that CNP operators, or
State agencies purchasing on their behalf, have maximum flexibility to
adopt their own definitions of ``local'' and did not prescribe a
Federal definition for the purpose of procuring local foods for CNPs.
The 2024 rule explanatory language also maintained flexibility for CNP
operators by continuing to note that Federal regulations do not
prescribe the way that geographic preference (i.e., the defined scoring
advantage) may be applied or the amount of preference, such as
additional credits or points, that can be given to local products.
However, the 2024 rule did not add language to program regulations
affirming to CNP operators that this flexibility was available to them.
Since the 2024 rule went into effect, USDA has published both
implementation guidance and anticipatory policy guidance to support
program operators implementing the provision.\5\ This guidance has
helped prevent and address many technical assistance questions related
to implementation. This direct final rule codifies clarifying aspects
from that guidance by removing unnecessary language, clearly outlining
geographic preference option strategies, and making nonsignificant copy
edits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ SP 22-2024, CACFP 08-2024, SFSP 13-2024, Geographic
Preference Expansion Related to the Final Rule titled, Child
Nutrition Programs: Meal Patterns Consistent With the 2020-2025
Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Available at: <a href="https://www.fns.usda.gov/f2s/geographic-preference-expansion">https://www.fns.usda.gov/f2s/geographic-preference-expansion</a>. SP 24-2024,
CACFP 10-2024, SFSP 14, 2024 Geographic Preference Option Questions
& Answers. Available at: <a href="https://www.fns.usda.gov/f2s/geographic-preference-option-qa-memo">https://www.fns.usda.gov/f2s/geographic-preference-option-qa-memo</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This direct final rule:
1. Replaces ``procurement specification'' with ``product
specification'' to align with industry terminology.
2. Replaces ``selection criteria'' with ``defined scoring
advantage'' to align with policy guidance.
3. Affirms that CNP operators have the flexibility to prescribe the
way that a defined scoring advantage is applied and the amount of
preference given to a product that meets their definition of local.
4. Reformats the regulatory text to clearly describe how geographic
preference strategies may be applied during the procurement process as
a product specification, a defined scoring advantage during bid
evaluation, or a mix of both strategies.
5. Clarifies that CNP operators may use, but are not limited to,
the phrases ``local,'' ``locally grown,'' ``locally raised,'' and
``locally caught'' in their solicitations.
6. Removes the undefined term ``minimally processed'' since all
allowable food handling and preservation techniques are specified in
the definition of ``unprocessed agricultural products.''
7. For SBP, SMP, CACFP, and SFSP, revises regulations to refer back
to NSLP geographic preference option regulations for consistency.
Accordingly, this direct final rule amends 7 CFR 210.21(g),
215.14a(e), 220.16(f), 225.17(e), and 226.22(c) to clarify how to apply
the geographic preference option for the procurement of local,
unprocessed agricultural products.
This direct final rule is not subject to the requirement to provide
notice and an opportunity for public comment because it falls under the
good cause exception at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The good cause exception is
satisfied when notice and comment is ``impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest.'' As stated before, the changes in
this direct final rule do not alter the meaning of the regulations or
their implementation; rather, they are intended to clarify existing
regulatory requirements. It is unnecessary to provide notice and an
opportunity for public comment because there is no change to
regulations that impact the public.
If a significant adverse comment applies to a part of the direct
final rule and that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule,
USDA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the
subject of the significant adverse comment.
Procedural Matters
Regulatory Impact Analysis
This rule is necessary to correct inadequate information in the
existing regulatory language that has hitherto been clarified via
agency-issued guidance, which is less formal and binding than a rule
and may be overlooked by some program operators despite the agency's
best efforts to promulgate the information. By formalizing these
clarifications in regulation, the government will ensure that all
program operators have access to the same information in determining
geographic preference.
USDA assessed possible benefits of the final rule, assuming a
baseline counterfactual in which the agency continues to clarify
geographic preference via guidance. Because the direct final rule
merely clarifies existing guidance and codifies available practices, it
does not alter the baseline regulatory environment. Formal
clarification of ambiguities through edits to the regulatory language
may help reach those who were not aware of the guidance, increase
Federal government efficiency by removing the need to re-circulate the
guidance or provide redundant technical assistance to those who were
unaware of the guidance, and reduce administrative burden for program
operators who wish to procure local foods. Any such benefits are likely
to be minimal, however, because these clarifications were already
officially available from USDA to program operators, posted on the
agency website and sent via PartnerWeb so all operators have access.
USDA also assessed possible cost impacts. To the extent that these
clarifications induce any marginal shift in procurement patterns--
which, as noted, we believe unlikely--purchasing decisions by program
operators remain bounded by price-reasonableness standards. As a
result, any induced substitution toward geographically preferred
vendors is expected to be cost-
[[Page 57247]]
neutral, generating no incremental costs relative to the baseline.
Executive Order 12866, 13563, and 14192
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule is considered an Executive Order 14192
deregulatory action.
This direct final rule has been determined to be significant and
was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in
conformance with Executive Order 12866.
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. Pursuant to that review, it has
been certified that this rule would not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
While the clarifications made with this rulemaking may help some
small businesses increase market opportunities and sales, this direct
final rule would not have an impact on small entities because it does
not change the meaning of the regulations or their implementation.
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 a major rule, as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the
Department generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures by State, local or Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector, of $146 million
or more (when adjusted for inflation; GDP deflator source: Table 1.1.9
at <a href="http://www.bea.gov/iTable">http://www.bea.gov/iTable</a>) in any one year. When such a statement is
needed for a rule, Section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the
Department to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the most cost effective or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule.
This direct final rule does not contain Federal mandates (under the
regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local and
Tribal governments or the private sector of $146 million or more in any
one year. Thus, the rule is not subject to the requirements of sections
202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Executive Order 12372
The SBP, NSLP, SMP, CACFP, and SFSP are listed in the Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance under SBP No. 10.553, NSLP No. 10.555, SMP
No. 10.556, CACFP No. 10.558, and SFSP No. 10.559, respectively, and
are subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental
consultation with State and local officials. (See 2 CFR chapter IV.)
Since the Child Nutrition Programs are State-administered, USDA's FNA
Regional Offices have formal and informal discussions with State and
local officials, including representatives of Indian Tribal
Organizations, on an ongoing basis regarding program requirements and
operations. This provides USDA with the opportunity to receive regular
input from program administrators and contributes to the development of
feasible program requirements.
Federalism Summary Impact Statement
Executive Order 13132 requires Federal agencies to consider the
impact of their regulatory actions on State and local governments.
Where such actions have Federalism implications, agencies are directed
to provide a statement for inclusion in the preamble to the regulations
describing the agency's considerations in terms of the three categories
called for under Section (6)(b)(2)(B) of Executive Order 13132.
The Department has determined that this rule does not have
Federalism implications. This rule does not impose substantial or
direct compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore,
under Section 6(b) of the Executive Order, a Federalism summary impact
statement is not required.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform
This direct 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
USDA has reviewed the direct final rule, in accordance with the
Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (the 2018 Farm Bill), Section
12403, Civil Rights Analyses, to identify and address any major civil
rights impacts the direct final rule may have on specific groups. The
promulgation of this direct final rule will expand local food access in
all CNPs for all participants. It is unlikely that this direct final
rule will have a civil rights impact on State agencies, Program
operators, program participants, or food producers as the changes are
customer-focused and intended to simplify program regulation language.
USDA will continue engaging with State agencies and Program
operators to address any needs and/or challenges associated with the
updated geographic preference option regulatory language. In accordance
with applicable laws, regulations and directives, USDA will also
propose further outreach and mitigation strategies to alleviate any
unforeseen impacts, if deemed necessary.
Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 13175 requires Federal agencies to consult and
coordinate with Tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies
that have Tribal implications, including regulations, legislative
comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or
actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. We are unaware of any Tribal
implications of this rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chap. 35; 5 CFR
1320) requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approve all
collections of information by a Federal agency before
[[Page 57248]]
they can be implemented. Respondents are not required to respond to any
collection of information unless it displays a current valid OMB
control number.
This rule contains information collections that have been approved
by OMB under OMB numbers 0584-0006, 0584-0012, 0584-0055, 0584-0280,
and 0584-0005. The rule does not add new information collection
requirements, nor does it alter the burden associated with existing
requirements.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Department is committed to complying with the E-Government Act,
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
7 CFR Part 210
Food assistance programs, Grant programs--education, Grant
programs--health, Infants and children, Nutrition, Penalties, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, School breakfast and lunch programs,
Surplus agricultural commodities.
7 CFR Part 215
Food assistance programs, Grant programs--education, Grant
programs--health, Infants and children, Milk, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
7 CFR Part 220
Grant programs--education, Grant programs--health, Infants and
children, Nutrition, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, School
breakfast and lunch programs.
7 CFR Part 225
Food assistance programs, Grant programs--health, Infants and
children, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
7 CFR Part 226
Accounting, Aged, Day care, Food assistance programs, Grant
programs, Grant programs--health, Indians, Individuals with
disabilities, Infants and children, Intergovernmental relations, Loan
programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surplus
agricultural commodities.
Accordingly, 7 CFR parts 210, 215, 220, 225, and 226 are amended as
follows:
PART 210--NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for part 210 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1751-1760, 1779.
0
2. In Sec. 210.21, revise paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 210.21 Procurement.
* * * * *
(g) Geographic preference. (1) School food authorities
participating in the Program and State agencies making purchases on
behalf of school food authorities, may apply the geographic preference
option when procuring local, unprocessed agricultural products. The
geographic preference option may be applied using the following
strategies, either singly or in combination:
(i) A ``local product specification,'' a written product
description in a solicitation that identifies the local area from which
the unprocessed agricultural product must originate for a bid to be
considered responsive; or
(ii) A ``defined scoring advantage,'' a preference that gives
additional credits or points for unprocessed agricultural products from
a specified local area during bid evaluation. School food authorities
and State agencies making purchases on behalf of school food
authorities have the discretion to determine the method for applying a
defined scoring advantage and to determine the amount of preference to
give to products that meet their definition of local.
(2) In paragraph (g)(1) of this section, ``local'' means products
that are locally grown, raised, or caught. School food authorities
making the purchase and State agencies making purchases on behalf of
school food authorities may use, but are not limited to, terms like
``local,'' ``locally grown,'' ``locally raised,'' and ``locally
caught'' in their solicitations and have the discretion to determine
the local area to which geographic preference will be applied, so long
as there are an appropriate number of qualified firms able to compete.
(3) In paragraph (g)(1) of this section, ``unprocessed agricultural
products'' means only agricultural products that retain their inherent
character. The following food handling and preservation techniques are
not considered to change the inherent character of an agricultural
product:
(i) Cooling;
(ii) Refrigerating;
(iii) Freezing;
(iv) Size adjustment made by peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting,
chopping, shucking, and grinding;
(v) Forming ground products into patties without any additives or
fillers;
(vi) Drying/dehydration;
(vii) Washing;
(viii) Packaging (such as placing eggs in cartons), vacuum packing
and bagging (such as placing vegetables in bags or combining two or
more types of vegetables or fruits in a single package);
(ix) Adding ascorbic acid or other preservatives to prevent
oxidation of produce;
(x) Butchering livestock and poultry;
(xi) Cleaning fish; and
(xii) Pasteurizing milk.
* * * * *
PART 215--SPECIAL MILK PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN
0
3. The authority citation for part 215 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1772 and 1779.
0
4. In Sec. 215.14a:
0
a. Revise paragraph (e); and
0
b. Remove the parenthetical authority citation at the end of the
section.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 215.14a Procurement standards.
* * * * *
(e) Geographic preference. School food authorities participating in
the Program may apply the geographic preference option under Sec.
210.21(g) of this chapter.
PART 220--SCHOOL BREAKFAST PROGRAM
0
5. The authority citation for part 220 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1773, 1779, unless otherwise noted.
0
6. In Sec. 220.16:
0
a. Revise paragraph (f); and
0
b. Remove the parenthetical authority citation at the end of the
section.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 220.16 Procurement standards.
* * * * *
(f) Geographic preference. School food authorities participating in
the Program may apply the geographic preference option under Sec.
210.21(g) of this chapter.
PART 225--SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM
0
7. The authority citation for part 225 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 9, 13 and 14, Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1758, 1761 and 1762a).
0
8. In Sec. 225.17, revise paragraph (e) to read as follows:
[[Page 57249]]
Sec. 225.17 Procurement standards.
* * * * *
(e) Sponsors participating in the Program may apply the geographic
preference option under Sec. 210.21(g) of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 226--CHILD AND ADULT CARE FOOD PROGRAM
0
9. The authority citation for part 226 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 9, 11, 14, 16, and 17, Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1758, 1759a, 1762a,
1765 and 1766).
0
10. In Sec. 226.22, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 226.22 Procurement standards.
* * * * *
(c) Geographic preference. Institutions participating in the
Program may apply the geographic preference option under Sec.
210.21(g) of this chapter.
Shiela Corley,
Acting Administrator, Food and Nutrition Administration.
[FR Doc. 2026-18337 Filed 9-8-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 9, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.