Proposed Rule2026-22944
Modification to Work Requirements for Able-Bodied Adults
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
November 10, 2026
Issuing agencies
Agriculture DepartmentFood and Nutrition Administration
Abstract
The proposed rule would codify USDA's regulatory implementation of provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 (OBBB) changing the three-month time limit for certain participants subject to work requirements in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). These changes include modifying the list of exceptions from the time limit for certain populations; updating requirements for areas to qualify for waivers of the time limit; and adding the temporary good faith exemptions in Alaska and Hawaii. Additionally, this rule proposes to strengthen requirements for requesting waivers of the time limit and revise the SNAP definition of a homeless individual.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 216 (Tuesday, November 10, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 216 (Tuesday, November 10, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72439-72454]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-22944]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 10, 2026 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 72439]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Administration
7 CFR Parts 271 and 273
[FNA-2025-0368]
RIN 0584-AF09
Modification to Work Requirements for Able-Bodied Adults
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Administration (FNA), USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The proposed rule would codify USDA's regulatory
implementation of provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025
(OBBB) changing the three-month time limit for certain participants
subject to work requirements in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP). These changes include modifying the list of exceptions
from the time limit for certain populations; updating requirements for
areas to qualify for waivers of the time limit; and adding the
temporary good faith exemptions in Alaska and Hawaii. Additionally,
this rule proposes to strengthen requirements for requesting waivers of
the time limit and revise the SNAP definition of a homeless individual.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 10,
2026.
ADDRESSES: The Food and Nutrition Administration, USDA, invites
interested persons to submit written comments on this proposed rule.
Comments may be submitted in writing by one of the following methods:
<bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: 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 SNAP Program Development Division,
Food and Nutrition Administration, 5601 Sunnyside Ave., Beltsville, MD
20705. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#683b2629382b382a3a1d040d1b281d1b0c09460f071e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="267568677665766474534a4355665355424708414950">[email protected]</span></a>. Phone: (703) 305-2022.
<bullet> Website: Go to <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow the
online instructions for submitting comments.
<bullet> Email: Send comments to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f1a2bfb0a1b2a1b3a3849d9482b184829590df969e87"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a3f0ede2f3e0f3e1f1d6cfc6d0e3d6d0c7c28dc4ccd5">[email protected]</span></a>. Include
``Docket ID Number FNA-2025-0368, Modification to Work Requirements for
Able-Bodied Adults'' in the subject line of the message.
<bullet> All written comments submitted in response to this
proposed 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: SNAP Program Development Division,
Food and Nutrition Administration, 5601 Sunnyside Ave., Beltsville, MD
20705. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e6b5a8a7b6a5b6a4b4938a8395a693958287c8818990"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ebb8a5aabba8bba9b99e878e98ab9e988f8ac58c849d">[email protected]</span></a>. Phone: (703) 305-2022.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Implementation of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025
On July 4, 2025, President Trump signed Public Law 119-21, the One
Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 (OBBB). Section 10102 of the OBBB makes
significant changes to the time limit (also known as a work
requirement) for certain Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP) participants. These changes require more SNAP participants to
work as a condition of eligibility. The Department is issuing this
proposed rule to implement those OBBB provisions, as well as strengthen
standards for requests for waivers of the time limit and set clear
expectations that those who can work, do.
The OBBB provisions build on a longstanding and evolving
Congressional directive that SNAP must support work. Work requirements
were first implemented as a condition of SNAP eligibility in 1971 (Pub.
L. 91-671). In 1985, Congress required State agencies to operate an
employment and training program (SNAP E&T) which helps SNAP
participants gain skills that increase their employability and help
meet employers' skilled workforce needs. In 1996, the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA, Pub. L.
104-193) made pivotal changes, creating a time limit for certain
individuals not engaged in work. The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023
(FRA, Pub. L. 118-5) explicitly established that the purpose of SNAP
includes assisting low-income adults in obtaining employment and
increasing their earnings. This history, though not inclusive of all
changes to SNAP work requirements, demonstrates the long-standing
imperative that SNAP's purpose includes supporting participants in
finding employment and increasing earnings, and mitigating reliance on
the program.
SNAP work requirements include both general work requirements and
the time limit, formerly known as the able-bodied adults without
dependents (ABAWD) time limit. Under the general work requirements at
Section 6(d)(1) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (the Act) (7
U.S.C. 2015(d)(1)), individuals must register for work; accept offers
of suitable employment; not voluntarily quit or reduce hours of
employment below 30 hours per week without good cause; and participate
in workfare or SNAP E&T if required by the State agency. SNAP
participants subject to these requirements that do not comply are
disqualified from receiving SNAP benefits for periods ranging from one
month to permanent disqualifications, depending on the number of
violations and State options. The general work requirements apply to
SNAP participants aged 16 through 59, unless they meet specific
exemptions such as being unable to work due to physical or mental
limitations.
In addition to the general work requirements, SNAP has a time limit
and associated work requirements for certain individuals. Under the
time limit, per Section 6(o) of the Act (7 U.S.C. 2015(o)), individuals
must work and/or participate in a qualifying work program for at least
20 hours per week (averaged to 80 hours per month) or participate in
workfare as assigned. Time-limited participants may only receive SNAP
for three months in a 36-month period in which they do not comply with
this requirement.
The OBBB changed who is subject to the time limit to now apply to
SNAP participants aged 18 through 64 who do not meet an exception such
as being physically or mentally unfit for
[[Page 72440]]
employment, responsible for a child under 14, pregnant, or an
``Indian'', ``Urban Indian'' or ``California Indian''. These changes
are explained in the discussion of proposed changes below.
Section 6(o)(4) of the Act (7 U.S.C. 2015(o)(4)) also allows the
Department to approve State requests to waive the time limit in areas
in certain circumstances. Waivers of the time limit allow for
individuals residing in waived areas to continue participating in SNAP
even if they do not meet the work requirement associated with the time
limit, given they are otherwise eligible. Waivers of the time limit do
not absolve State agencies of their responsibility to support
participants in finding employment. State agencies must continue to
track time-limited participants in waived areas to ensure program
integrity when the waiver expires.
Prior to the OBBB, time limit waiver criteria included areas with
unemployment rates over 10 percent or areas without a sufficient number
of jobs to provide employment. The OBBB removed the ability for areas
to qualify based on a lack of a sufficient number of jobs. Now, State
agencies, except for Alaska and Hawaii, may only qualify for waivers
for areas with unemployment rates of over 10 percent. The OBBB allows
waivers for areas in Alaska and Hawaii with unemployment rates at least
1.5 times the national average.
II. Discussion of Proposed Changes
This proposed rule would codify USDA's regulatory implementation of
OBBB provisions on individual exceptions from the time limit;
geographic waivers of the time limit; and good-faith exemptions from
the time limit for noncontiguous States, as defined by 7 U.S.C.
2015(o)(7)(A). The Department is also proposing additional changes to
criteria for waivers of the time limit to define ``area'' and
requirements for supporting data at 7 CFR 273.24(f) to ensure waivers
reflect recent, sustained, and accurate unemployment rates.
Additionally, the Department proposes to revise the definition of
``homeless individual'' to remove the inclusion of the term
``imminently homeless''. Together, these changes will ensure the
program continues to focus on self-sufficiency for those who can work.
The Department intends for the rule provisions codifying USDA's
regulatory implementation of OBBB changes and the rule provisions
proposing discretionary changes, including those requiring supporting
data for waivers and the revisions to the definition of ``homeless
individual'', to be separate and severable from one another. If any
provision related to the discretionary provisions is stayed or
determined to be invalid, the Department intends that the remaining
provisions related to codifying USDA's regulatory implementation of
statutory changes in regulation shall remain in effect. For example, a
court could invalidate the rule's proposal to ensure supporting data
reflects recent, sustained, and accurate unemployment rates. In such a
case, any provision related to a statutory change, such as the
unemployment rate threshold for waivers, should remain in effect
because those provisions ``could function sensibly without the stricken
provision''.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ MD/DC/DE Broadcasters Ass'n v. F.C.C., 253 F.3d 732, 734
(D.C. Cir. 2001) (internal quotations omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department has historically referred to the population of
individuals subject to the time limit as able-bodied adults without
dependents (ABAWDs). Given changes required by OBBB, some adults with
dependents aged 14 through 17 are now subject to the time limit. To
accurately reflect this change and use plain language, the Department
is no longer using the term able-bodied adults without dependents
(ABAWDs). Instead, the Department will refer to the ``time limit'' or
``time-limited participants'' where possible. In accordance with this
change, the Department proposes to revise the title of 7 CFR 273.24 to
``SNAP Time Limit''.
Section 10102(a) of the OBBB--Changes to Exceptions From the Time Limit
Section 6(o)(3) of the Act provides exceptions from the time limit
for certain individuals. If an individual meets one of the exceptions,
they are not subject to the time limit. These exceptions include, but
are not limited to, individuals:
<bullet> under 18, or over 65 years of age;
<bullet> medically certified as physically or mentally unfit for
employment;
<bullet> a parent or other member of a household with
responsibility for a dependent child under 14 years of age;
<bullet> otherwise exempt from the general work requirements under
subsection (d)(2);
<bullet> a pregnant woman;
<bullet> an Indian or Urban Indian (as such terms are defined in
paragraphs (13) and (28) of section 5 of the Indian Health Care
Improvement Act); or
<bullet> a California Indian described in section 809(a) of the
Indian Health Care Improvement Act.
Throughout this proposed rule, ``exceptions from the time limit''
refers to the list of exception criteria at Section 6(o)(3) of the Act,
whereas ``exemptions from the general work requirements'' refers to the
list of criteria in Section 6(d)(2) of the Act. Section 10102(a) of the
OBBB amends Section 6(o)(3) of the Act to change the exceptions from
the time limit, as discussed below.
Age-Based Exceptions
The OBBB increases the upper age limit for time-limited
participants at Section 6(o)(3)(A) of the Act from over 55 years of age
to over 65 years of age. This proposed rule would amend paragraph 7 CFR
273.24(c)(1) to increase the upper age limit to 65 years of age or
older.
Prior to enactment of the OBBB, the upper age limit was amended by
the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (FRA) to gradually increase the
upper age limit from over 50 years of age to over 55 years of age
between September 1, 2023, through October 1, 2024. The FRA also
prescribed that these changes would sunset on October 1, 2030, when the
upper age limit would return to over 50 years of age. This sunset is
captured at 7 CFR 273(c)(10). The OBBB provision changing the upper age
limit to over 65 years of age does not sunset. Therefore, this proposed
rule would strike 7 CFR 273.24(c)(10) to remove the reference to the
sunsetting of these FRA provisions.
Individuals aged 60 to 64 are not subject to the general work
requirements, per section 6(d)(1)(A) of the Act. Although the OBBB did
not change who is subject to the general work requirements, it
increased the upper age limit for the time limit to include individuals
through age 64. In other words, the OBBB created a new group of
individuals, aged 60 to 64, who are not subject to the general work
requirements but are time-limited participants.
Individuals aged 60 through 64 are excepted from the time limit if
they meet one of the exemptions from the general work requirements at
Section 6(d)(2), as would be individuals aged 18 through 59. For
instance, a 63-year old already working 30 hours a week or complying
with work requirements for unemployment compensation is excepted from
the time limit. However, since age is not a listed exemption from the
general work requirements at Section 6(d)(2), individuals aged 60 to 64
are not excepted from the time limit based solely on age. When the
Department initially wrote the regulations around general work
requirements, it included age as an exemption for simplification
purposes in program rules at 7 CFR 273.7(b)(1)(i). To help clarify that
individuals aged 60 to 64 are not subject to the general work
[[Page 72441]]
requirements but subject to the time limit, this proposed rule would
revise the exception at 7 CFR 273.24(c)(5) to reference 7 CFR
273.7(b)(1)(ii) through (vii) instead of the entire paragraph 7 CFR
273.7(b).
Changes to the Exception for Children in the Household
The OBBB amends the exception at Section 6(o)(3)(C) of the Act for
a parent or other member of a household with responsibility for a
dependent child by lowering the age of the dependent child from under
18 years of age to under 14 years. This proposed rule would update the
age in both paragraphs 7 CFR 273.24(c)(3) and (4) to reflect ``under
age 14'' to align with the law.
End of Exceptions Implemented by the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023
The OBBB removes the temporary exceptions at Section 6(o)(3) of the
Act for homeless individuals, veterans, and individuals 24 years of age
or younger and in foster care on their 18th birthday (or higher age if
the State offers extended foster care to a higher age). This proposed
rule would codify USDA's regulatory implementation of these changes by
replacing paragraphs 7 CFR 273.24(c)(7) through (8) with new exceptions
for ``an Indian or Urban Indian'' or ``a California Indian'' as
described in the section below and strike paragraph 7 CFR 273.24(c)(9).
Prior to enactment of OBBB, the exceptions for homeless
individuals, veterans, and individuals 24 years of age or younger and
in foster case on their 18th birthday had been added by the FRA
effective September 1, 2023. The FRA had also prescribed that these
changes would sunset on October 1, 2030, which is captured at 7 CFR
273(c)(10). Given this sunset is no longer applicable, this rule would
strike 7 CFR 273.24(c)(10).
Definition of Homeless Individual
The Department also proposes to amend the SNAP definition of
``homeless individual''. The December 17, 2024, final rule
``Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Program Purpose and Work
Requirement Provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023''
revised the definition of ``homeless individual'' to include
individuals who will imminently lose their nighttime residence. That
change sought to provide consistency in how State agencies determined
if an individual was experiencing homelessness, particularly as
homelessness was a new exception from the time limit. OBBB removed
homelessness as an exception from the time limit, but this status
continues to impact other components of SNAP eligibility, such as the
homeless shelter deduction. To prevent misapplication of policy and
align with the Act's statutory definition of ``homeless individual'' at
Section 2(l) of the Act, the Department proposes to revert to the
language at 7 CFR 271.2, removing the reference to individuals who are
``imminently homeless.''
New Exceptions
The OBBB adds new exceptions at Section 6(o)(3)(F) and (G) of the
Act for ``an Indian or Urban Indian'' and ``a California Indian'' as
defined under the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA). The
Department proposes adding these new exceptions to the list of
exceptions by replacing 7 CFR 273.24(c)(7) and (8). As explained
previously, the OBBB removed the exceptions currently provided at 7 CFR
273.24(c)(8) and (9). The Department proposes to include in the
regulatory text references to the applicable IHCIA definitions and is
interested in comments that include recommendations for clearly
communicating these definitions or aligning with similar exceptions for
the new Medicaid community engagement requirements under Section 71119
of the OBBB.
Section 10102(b) of the OBBB--Changes to Waivers of the Time Limit
Section 6(o)(4) of the Act authorizes the Department to approve
waivers of the time limit at the request of the State agency for any
group of individuals in the State upon the determination that the area
meets certain criteria. Section 10102(b) of the OBBB amends the
criteria under which the Department may approve a State agency request
for a waiver of the time limit as described below.
End of Criterion Allowing Waivers Based on Lack of Sufficient Jobs
Section 10102(b)(1) of the OBBB removes the Act's criterion
allowing waivers upon the determination an area does not have a
sufficient number of jobs to provide employment for the individuals.
State agencies may now only qualify for waivers for areas with
unemployment rates of over 10 percent per Section 6(o)(4)(A)(i), with
the exception of Alaska and Hawaii. Consistent with these changes, the
rule would strike the criterion allowing waivers based on a lack of
sufficient jobs at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(1)(ii). Current regulations also
detail the required data to support a waiver request and provide
readily approvable waivers under certain circumstances under the lack
of sufficient jobs criterion. This proposed rule would strike those
portions of the regulations at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2)(ii) and 7 CFR
273.24(f)(3)(ii) and (3)(iii).
New Criterion for Noncontiguous States
Section 10102(b)(1) of the OBBB updates Section 6(o)(4)(A)(ii) to
authorize the Secretary to approve waivers for areas in a noncontiguous
State with an unemployment rate that is at or above 1.5 times the
national unemployment rate. This proposed rule would include the
criterion allowing such waivers at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(1)(ii).
A noncontiguous State, per Section 10102(b)(2) of the OBBB, is a
State that is not one of the 48 contiguous states, the District of
Columbia, Guam, nor the U.S. Virgin Islands. In this rule, the
Department refers to Alaska and Hawaii by name as the noncontiguous
States. The Department proposes to include the definition of
noncontiguous States in the list of definitions for the time limit at 7
CFR 273.24(a)(5).
Additional Proposed Changes to Required Data for Waivers of the Time
Limit
In addition to codifying USDA's regulatory implementation of
statutory changes to waivers of the time limit, the Department also
proposes to amend current rules on requirements for data sources and
time-periods to support unemployment rates of 10 percent. These updated
standards would also apply to OBBB's new provision for assessing
unemployment rates in noncontiguous states. The Department believes
these changes are necessary to ensure the integrity of waivers.
Required Data--Unemployment Rate Over 10 Percent
Current rules at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2)(i) provide examples of three
kinds of data State agencies may use to demonstrate an area has an
unemployment rate of over 10 percent including: a recent 12-month
average unemployment rate over 10 percent; a recent three-month average
unemployment rate over 10 percent; or a historical seasonal
unemployment rate over 10 percent.
The Department proposes revising the data requirements to ensure
that waivers are based on sustained, recent unemployment rates from a
reputable source. The Department is concerned that historical seasonal
unemployment data may not depict current unemployment challenges.
Further, States have not typically requested waivers based on
historical data and the Department has not approved a waiver under this
criterion in more than two
[[Page 72442]]
decades. Similarly, the Department is concerned that using a recent
three-month average unemployment rate risks reflecting a short-term
aberration, rather than ongoing unemployment issues. Although FNA has
approved waivers based on recent three-month average unemployment
rates, this has not been nearly as common as using recent 12-month
average unemployment rates. Consistent with the criterion for
noncontiguous States, the Department proposes requiring at 7 CFR
273.23(f)(2)(i) that a State agency must provide data from the BLS or a
BLS-cooperating agency demonstrating that an area has a recent 12-month
average unemployment rate over 10 percent.
While the Department proposes removing the three-month average
unemployment rate from 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2)(i), the proposed rule would
allow waivers for areas based on a three-month average unemployment
rate of over 10 percent if the State shows the recent data is tied to
an exceptional circumstance affecting the area, as detailed below.
However, historical seasonal unemployment rates would no longer be
sufficient for waiver approval.
Required Data--Unemployment Rate 1.5 Times the National Average
The Department also proposes setting standards for the data
required to demonstrate areas in noncontiguous States have unemployment
rates at or above 1.5 times the national average unemployment rate.
Establishing such standards is important to ensure any such waivers are
based on recent and sustained qualifying unemployment rates, calculated
using reputable data sources.
As discussed above, State agencies have historically been able to
support waiver requests based on a range of data time periods under
program rules at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2). The Department maintains the need
to ensure State agencies use reliable sources, therefore, the
Department proposes to include at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2)(ii) that
noncontiguous States must provide data from the BLS or a BLS-
cooperating agency that shows an area has a recent 12-month average
unemployment rate at or above 1.5 times the national average to support
waiver requests under this criterion, similar to the proposed data
requirements for the waiver criterion available for all States,
discussed previously.
The Department also understands that noncontiguous States have
unique and remote geographies with distinct labor markets and data
challenges, and proposes to account for some such scenarios, as
described in the sections below on exceptional circumstances and areas
with limited data or evidence. The Department also seeks comments on
any other strategies to accurately assess unemployment rates in areas
of noncontiguous States.
Required Data--Exceptional Circumstances
The Department recognizes exceptional circumstances may arise that
cause the unemployment rate in an area to meet the required thresholds
but cannot be demonstrated using the data criteria outlined in the
proposed 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2). As such, the Department is proposing at 7
CFR 273.24(f)(3) to allow for waiver requests supported by data or
evidence other than what is listed at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2) if the request
demonstrates an exceptional circumstance in the area that is ongoing at
the time of request. This would not allow waivers of the time limit for
reasons other than meeting unemployment rate thresholds required in
law. Rather, it would allow State agencies to submit data covering a
different period given an exceptional circumstance. For example, a
State agency may submit data that shows an area has a most recent
three-month average unemployment rate over 10 percent and there is a
continued impact on unemployment rates due to an exceptional
circumstance, such as a natural disaster impacting unemployment.
Required Data--Areas With Limited Data or Evidence
Although current regulations at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2) require that
waiver requests based on unemployment rates or labor force data rely on
BLS data or methods, the Department recognizes that in some areas, such
as a reservation area or U.S. Territory, data from BLS or a BLS-
cooperating agency is limited or unavailable and the use of alternative
data is reasonable. For instance, longstanding guidance allows for use
of estimated unemployment rates for reservation areas based on
available BLS data, in combination with data from the American
Community Survey.\2\ Additionally, the Department understands that some
areas such as Tribal or Territory governments may generate and use
their own labor force data. Given that the BLS or a BLS-cooperating
agency is the national authority on unemployment data, the Department
proposes that, when available, State agencies must continue to use BLS
or BLS-cooperating data at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2)(i) and (ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ <a href="https://www.fna.usda.gov/snap/guide-supporting-requests-waive-time-limit-abawd">https://www.fna.usda.gov/snap/guide-supporting-requests-waive-time-limit-abawd</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If data from the BLS or a BLS-cooperating agency is unavailable,
the Department proposes to continue to allow State agencies to provide
alternative data sources or methods. This is particularly important for
reservation areas and remote areas in noncontiguous States for which
there is limited BLS data. The Department proposes to implement these
requirements at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(4).
Additional Proposed Changes Restricting the Definition of Area for
Waivers of the Time Limit
As the Act does not define areas eligible for waivers of the time
limit, the Department seeks to clarify the definition of area for
waivers in regulation. Current rules at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(6) allow State
agencies nearly unfettered discretion to define the geographic area
included in waiver requests, which has led State agencies to create
waiver areas that maximize the waiver's coverage as opposed to focusing
on areas with the greatest unemployment. State agencies have used the
flexibility of the definition of area to pick data that best expand
waiver coverage rather than data that best reflect actual unemployment.
Congress has recognized States have intentionally reduced enforcement
of the SNAP work requirements through expansive waivers, leaving
approximately 40 percent of these work-ready individuals under a waiver
at the time of passage of the OBBB (H. Rept. 119-106 p.47). The
Department maintains the need to tighten waiver standards to assist
low-income adults in obtaining employment to increase their earnings
and move towards self-sufficiency, consistent with SNAP's program
purpose. Therefore, the Department proposes to establish reasonable,
straightforward parameters by defining an ``area'' at 7 CFR
273.24(f)(5) to mean a Commuting Zone, county or county-equivalent,
reservation area or a U.S. Territory.
Additionally, under current regulatory flexibilities, State
agencies developed the practice of combining two or more sub-State
areas, such as counties, together as a group (otherwise referred to as
``grouped'' areas or ``grouping''). The current regulations have two
general conditions for the grouping of areas--that the areas must be
either contiguous and/or share the same economic region. For example,
two or more contiguous counties, or several contiguous counties and a
township could be grouped together. The group's average unemployment
rate
[[Page 72443]]
is calculated by combining the unemployment and labor force figures
from each individual area--in this case each county and township
included. Calculating aggregate unemployment rates in this manner can
mask important differences in the unemployment rate and labor market of
each area when examined individually.
State agencies frequently combine areas with lower unemployment
rates with those with higher unemployment rates so that the whole group
qualifies, even when some of the areas would not qualify individually.
This has allowed entire States or large areas of States to qualify for
waivers of the time limit, despite vastly different unemployment rates.
For example, under the now repealed lack of sufficient jobs standard,
California's Statewide waiver of the time limit beginning in FY 2025,
grouped areas such as Imperial County on the Southeast border of the
State where there was a 17.5 percent unemployment rate with San Mateo
County, outside of San Francisco, where there was a 3.2 percent
unemployment rate. Individuals are not reasonably traveling nearly 600
miles between these counties to work, yet the data supporting this
waiver approval included both counties in the same economic area. This
practice provides States with the broad flexibility to distort the data
and maximize waiver areas rather than examine whether the job market in
each area necessitates a waiver. This proposal would prevent grouping
of such disparate areas in the future by restricting the definition of
area to mean a Commuting Zone, county or county-equivalent, reservation
area or a U.S. Territory, and omit Statewide groupings.
State agencies have also acknowledged motives for seeking waivers
which do not conform to statutory intent. In 2016, a USDA Office of the
Inspector General (OIG) review of the implementation of the time limit
found that State agency officials reported that they specifically
sought waivers in as many areas of the State as possible to avoid the
burden of implementing the policy.\3\ Other State agencies reported
waivers of the time limit reduced their workloads. The Department
reminds State agencies that even in waived areas, the State agency is
responsible for tracking time-limited participants and ensuring its
ability to accurately administer the time limit when the waiver
expires. State agencies must also support time-limited participants
engaging in the workforce or preparing for work, such as through
employment and training programs--regardless of waiver status. Although
the Department recognizes there is administrative burden, Congress
designed the requirements to support work and move SNAP recipients on a
path to self-sufficiency (H. Rept. 104-725, p. 262).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ USDA OIG report ``FNS Controls Over SNAP Benefits for Able-
Bodied Adults Without Dependents'', available at <a href="https://usdaoig.oversight.gov/sites/default/files/reports/2023-03/27601-0002-31_fr.pdf">https://usdaoig.oversight.gov/sites/default/files/reports/2023-03/27601-0002-31_fr.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In recognition of the overly broad flexibility for defining areas
and grouping areas to aggregate unemployment rates, the Department
proposes to restrict the types of geographies that can qualify for
waivers, as detailed below.
Definition of Area--Commuting Zones
The Department recognizes that some localities have interconnected
unemployment conditions, and therefore, proposes to allow State
agencies to use the most recent Commuting Zones as areas for waiving
the time limit. USDA's Economic Research Service (ERS) first developed
Commuting Zones in the 1980s as a way to better delineate local
economies, as county boundaries are not always adequate confines for a
local economy. ERS last updated Commuting Zones in 2026 using data from
the 2020 Census.\4\ Commuting Zones group counties and county
equivalents into labor markets based on commuting patterns. Unlike
other labor market designations, such as the Office of Management and
Budget's Core Based Statistical Areas, Commuting Zone delineations
include all county and county-equivalents in the 50 States and the
District of Columbia. This allows better understanding of employment
and labor force patterns, particularly in rural counties. The 2026
update to Commuting Zones groups the 3,144counties and county-
equivalents in the U.S. into 588 labor markets. The Department proposes
to allow Commuting Zones to qualify as an allowable area for waivers of
the time limit given these geographic units of analysis are meant to
closely reflect where people live and work in the local economy. This
also would close the loophole that allows areas to be grouped together
for a waiver solely due to contiguousness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
2020 Commuting Zones, January 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since Commuting Zones can cross State borders, the Department is
also proposing to allow the intrastate parts of interstate Commuting
Zones to qualify based on data from the entire Commuting Zone. A State
agency may only request a waiver for the intrastate portion of the
commuting zone (the portion that falls within State lines), however,
the data from the entire Commuting Zone may be used to support the
request as it is reflective of the employment conditions for the
intrastate portion. For instance, the Commuting Zone for Memphis,
Tennessee includes bordering counties in Mississippi and Arkansas based
on commuting data. Tennessee may request to waive the portion of the
Commuting Zone within State boundaries using data reflecting that
intrastate portion or the entire Commuting Zone.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service. 2020 Commuting Zones, January 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the State agency's geographic boundaries are entirely within one
interstate Commuting Zone, the entire State may qualify for a waiver
based on data from the entire interstate Commuting Zone. For example,
the District of Columbia falls entirely within a Commuting Zone that
includes counties in Maryland and Virginia. Given people regularly
commute between these areas for employment, it is reasonable to
consider the unemployment rate for both the District of Columbia itself
and the entire Commuting Zone.
The Department proposes to include Commuting Zones as a type of
waiver area at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(5)(i). Additionally, the Department
proposes paragraph 7 CFR 273.24(f)(6) to clarify requirements for areas
that cross State borders.
Definition of Area--County or County-Equivalents
The Department is also proposing at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(4)(ii) to
include counties or county-equivalents as allowable areas for waivers
of the time limit. This would allow State agencies to request to waive
individual counties or county-equivalents based on unemployment rates
reflecting circumstances in that localized area. State agencies would
not be able to group or aggregate data across counties or county-
equivalents unless they comprise a Commuting Zone, as discussed in the
prior section. The Department asserts a more targeted approach would
ensure that waivers exist only in areas that meet the criterion at
Section 6(o)(4)(A) of the Act.
Definition of Area--Reservation Areas and U.S. Territories
The Department proposes that waivers of the time limit may cover
the intrastate portion of reservation areas
[[Page 72444]]
and those U.S. Territories participating in SNAP (Guam and U.S. Virgin
Islands). Reservation areas and U.S. Territories are mentioned
separately since they are not typically included in Commuting Zones and
most do not have counties or county-equivalents. Reservation areas have
unique geography, data availability, and may cross State borders.
Consistent with Commuting Zones, the Department proposes to include the
intrastate portion of reservation areas and to include U.S. Territories
as allowable areas at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(4)(iii). Requests to waive the
intrastate portion of a reservation may also be supported by data from
the entire reservation.
The Department notes the potential overlap between waivers for
reservation areas and the exceptions from the time limit for
individuals who meet the definition of an ``Indian'', ``Urban Indian'',
or ``California Indian'' per Section 6(o)(3) of the Act. However, not
all individuals living in reservation areas will meet these exceptions.
In other words, an individual living in a reservation area is subject
to the time limit unless the individual meets the definition of an
``Indian'', ``Urban Indian'', or ``California Indian'', or the
reservation area in which the individual resides is approved for a
waiver.
Restriction on Grouping
Further, the Department proposes changes at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(7) to
restrict the practice of grouping. This would only allow combining data
from individual localities when they are collectively considered to be
an entire Commuting Zone or entire intrastate portion of an interstate
Commuting Zone. This will eliminate the opportunities to manipulate
data to waive areas that do not meet the criteria outlined in the Act.
It would also ensure that only areas that are economically tied are
grouped together. Under this proposal, State agencies would use the
unemployment and labor force data from the individual area to support
their requests. Requests may still include multiple areas, so long as
there is data provided that support each individual area that meets the
standards outlined in the revised 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2).
Additional Proposed Changes to Evaluating Requests for Waivers of the
Time Limit
The Department also proposes to improve the integrity of waivers
via changes to the duration of waiver approval, ensuring the support of
the chief executive in the State, and detailing the principle of
Secretarial discretion on such requests.
Duration of Waivers of the Time Limit
The Department also examined the duration of time limit waivers and
believes that, even with the proposed changes, the nexus between the
data and a waiver becomes untenable after one year. Current rules at 7
CFR 273.24(f)(5) provide for a one-year approval period, generally, but
also explain when the Department may or may not approve for this amount
of time. These circumstances for varied approval lengths include using
longer periods of data to support the length of the request, options to
request a shorter approval period, and the Department's right to
approve for longer periods if the reasons are compelling.
Over time, this flexibility for longer approval periods devolved
into a standard option for two-year waiver approvals. Existing guidance
allows for two-year approval periods when the request includes data
that meets certain circumstances. The Department is concerned that this
allows State agencies to receive longer approvals while incorporating
older data.
To ensure that waivers reflect current economic conditions, not
stale data, the Department proposes to streamline the duration of
approval periods to one year but allow for a shorter period at a State
agency's request by revising 7 CFR 273.24(f)(5) and redesignating 7 CFR
273.24(f)(8).
Chief Executive Officer Support of Waiver Requests
Section 4005(b)(2) of the Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018
(Pub. L. 115-334) amended the Act to require that a State agency's
request to waive the time limit be supported by the State's chief
executive officer. This requirement underscores the importance of
ensuring State leadership is aligned in how the State agency supports
work and addresses economic hardship in areas within the State. The
Department is taking this opportunity to incorporate in regulation that
the waiver request must have the support of the State chief executive
officer. The Department proposes to incorporate this update at 7 CFR
273.24(f)(1).
Secretarial Discretion
In addition to establishing the required employment conditions for
an area to be eligible to waive the time limit, Congress commits to the
Secretary additional discretion in approving these waivers at Section
6(o)(4) of the Act (``the Secretary may waive the [time limit] to any
group of individuals in the State if the Secretary makes a
determination that the area in which the individuals reside--(i) has an
unemployment of over 10 percent; or (ii) in a noncontiguous State and
has an unemployment rate that is at or above 1.5 times the national
unemployment rate.''). The language sets forth the mandatory conditions
which must exist before the Secretary may consider granting a waiver
request. The ``may waive'' language indicates that the Secretary is
under no obligation to grant a State agency's request for a waiver even
if the criteria in clause (i) or (ii) are met. The determination of
such unemployment rate thresholds is the necessary first step before
the Act empowers the Secretary with the discretion to render a decision
on the waiver request.
In order to better conform with the statutory directive to the
Secretary and avoid overly expansive waivers of time limits, the
Department proposes adding a new paragraph 7 CFR 273.24(f)(9) that
specifies FNA may deny requests to waive the time limit when contrary
evidence pertaining to the employment prospects for time-limited
participants in the requested area is available. The Department further
proposes to eliminate current paragraph 7 CFR 273.24(f)(3), which
allows for readily approvable waivers when a State agency provides
certain economic data. These proposed changes would remove provisions
that ignored the discretion provided to the Secretary by the statute
and ensure State agencies are aware that FNA may deny a request even
when it supplies the data required at 7 CFR 273.24(f)(2). Factors that
may be considered in exercising this discretion may include the
availability of recent, readily accessible, robust data that
contradicts the information supplied by the State agency. The
Department seeks comments on specific factors or measures it should
consider as part of its Secretarial discretion to approve waivers.
Section 10102(c) of the OBBB--Good Faith Exemptions From the Time Limit
Section 10102(c) of the OBBB establishes a new, temporary type of
exemption only for noncontiguous States at Section 6(o)(7) of the Act.
The Department may approve a State request to exempt individuals in
noncontiguous States from the time limit if it determines that the
State agency is demonstrating a good faith effort to comply with the
time limit requirements. This proposed rule would codify USDA's
regulatory implementation of this authority at 7 CFR 273.24(m).
The definition of noncontiguous State for good faith exemptions at
Section
[[Page 72445]]
6(o)(7)(A) of the Act is the same as for waivers of the time limit.
This definition only applies to Alaska and Hawaii. As discussed in a
previous section, the Department proposes to add this definition at 7
CFR 273.24(a)(5).
Under the OBBB, the Department will consider multiple factors to
determine whether to approve a State agency for a good faith effort
exemption. The factors include (1) any actions taken by the State
agency toward compliance with the time limit requirements; (2) any
significant barriers to or challenges in meeting those requirements,
including barriers or challenges relating to funding, design,
development, procurement, or installation of necessary systems or
resources; (3) the State agency's detailed plan and timeline for
achieving full compliance with those requirements, including key
milestones; and (4) any other criteria determined appropriate by the
Secretary. The Department proposes including subparagraph 7 CFR
273.24(m)(1) to require a State agency request for a good faith
exemption to include a description for each of the aforementioned
factors.
Given the authority to establish other criteria at Section
6(o)(7)(C)(iv), the Department proposes that the State agency must also
submit plans for using performance metrics and applying the exceptions
to certain populations.
The State agency must submit a detailed plan for tracking and
analyzing performance metrics for cases subject to the time limit.
Given good faith exemptions are designed to help State agencies reach
full compliance with administering the time limit, it is important the
State agency explain how it will take a data-informed approach to
understand its progress. The Department proposes to include this
requirement at 7 CFR 273.24(m)(1)(iv). The Department also seeks
comments on specific metrics the State agency could include in its
plan.
The State agency must also explain which populations in the State
it would exempt under the requested good faith exemption. This is
important for the Department to understand the limitations under which
the State agency will exempt individuals in the State. For instance, as
it works towards full compliance with administering the time limit, the
State agency may target populations in certain geographic areas of the
State, in a certain age range, or with other characteristics. The
Department proposes to include this requirement at 7 CFR
273.24(m)(1)(v).
Good faith exemptions expire no later than December 31, 2028, and
may not be renewed beyond that date per Section 6(o)(7)(D)(i) of the
Act. This proposed rule would include the sunset clause at 7 CFR
273.24(m)(2).
Additionally, the Department may terminate a good faith exemption
prior to the expiration date per Section 6(o)(7)(D)(ii) of the Act if
it determines that the State agency has (1) failed to comply with the
reporting requirements discussed in Section 6(o)(7)(E) of the Act; or
(2) based on such reported information the State agency has failed to
make continued good faith efforts towards compliance with the time
limit requirements. The Department proposes to include this early
termination clause at 7 CFR 273.24(m)(3).
If the Department grants a State agency a good faith exemption, the
State agency must submit information to the Department in accordance
with Section 6(o)(7)(E) of the Act. This information must include (1)
quarterly progress reports on the status of the State agency in
achieving the milestones toward full compliance with the time limit;
and (2) information on specific risks or newly identified barriers or
challenges to full compliance, including the State agency's plan to
mitigate those risks, barriers, or challenges. The Department proposes
such State agencies submit quarterly reports every three months
following implementation of the good faith exemption. The Department
proposes to include these State reporting requirements at 7 CFR
273.24(m)(4).
Procedural Matters
Executive Orders 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 proposed rule has been determined to be economically
significant under section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866 and was
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in conformance
with Executive Order 12866.
This proposed rule, if finalized as proposed, is expected to be
exempt from otherwise-applicable requirements of Executive Order 14192,
per footnote 1 of OMB's Accounting Methods.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ <a href="https://www.reginfo.gov/public/pdf/eo14192/Accounting_Methods_under_EO_14192.pdf">https://www.reginfo.gov/public/pdf/eo14192/Accounting_Methods_under_EO_14192.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Impact Analysis Summary
As required for all rules that have been designated as Significant
by the Office of Management and Budget, a Regulatory Impact Analysis
(RIA) was developed for this proposed rule. It follows this rule as an
Appendix. The following summarizes the conclusions of the regulatory
impact analysis:
Need for Action: This rulemaking codifies USDA's regulatory
implementation of provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025
(OBBB) (Pub. L. 119-21) addressing the time limit for receipt of
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for certain
individuals. In accordance with the OBBB, these changes would include
modifying the list of exceptions from the time limit for certain
populations; updating requirements for areas to qualify for waivers for
the time limit; and adding temporary good faith exemptions in Alaska
and Hawaii. Additionally, this rule also proposes to strengthen
requirements for requesting waivers of the time limit and revise the
SNAP definition of a homeless individual.
Benefits: The changes in this NPRM will align SNAP rules with the
changes in the OBBB. This is necessary to facilitate changes to program
implementation, thus reducing transaction cost of administering the
changes.
Costs: This rule will result in annual costs to State agencies, the
Federal Government, and households to request and approve waivers of
the SNAP time limit and to issue and receive Notices of Adverse Action
when participants are at risk of losing SNAP eligibility.
Unquantified Effects: The Regulatory Impact Analysis assesses the
projected changes in transfer payments and the increase in
administrative costs to individuals, States, and the Federal
government.
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. This proposed rule would not have
an impact on small entities because it
[[Page 72446]]
affects certification requirements for SNAP households, which are
administered by State agencies.
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 $100 million
or more 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 proposed 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 $100 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
This Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is listed in the
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under Number 10.551 and is
subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental
consultation with State and local officials. (See 2 CFR chapter IV.)
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 proposed 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 Proposed Rule, in accordance with the
Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, ``2018 Farm Bill'', Section 12403,
Civil Rights Analyses, to identify and address any major civil rights
impacts the Proposed Rule might have on specific groups. While the
Department believes that the changes to the exception criteria and
waiver criteria have the potential for impacting certain groups, these
changes are required under the statute. Other changes proposed to
strengthen requirements for waiver requests may also impact certain
groups due to external factors affecting rates of employment of members
of these groups. The Agency will implement the noted mitigation
strategies and monitor complaint activity. Additionally, the Civil
Rights Division will 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.
FNA provided an opportunity for consultation on October 15, 2025.
Additionally, five Tribal Organizations provided written comments. The
Tribes provided comments, summarized below, about data accuracy,
definitions of exceptions for ``Indians'', ``Urban Indians'' and
``California Indians'', verification standards, outreach, and SNAP
access, and Tribal administration.
The Tribes had comments concerning availability and accuracy of
unemployment data for tribal lands. Tribal Leaders indicated a desire
to self-certify Tribal unemployment data when State agencies request
waivers of the SNAP time limit due to discrepancies between the
unemployment data reported by the BLS and the data maintained by the
Tribes themselves. This proposed rule recognizes that data from the BLS
or a BLS-cooperating agency is limited or unavailable for reservation
areas. Given that the BLS or a BLS-cooperating agency is the national
authority on unemployment data, the Department proposes that, when
available, State agencies must continue to use such data. However, if
data from the BLS or a BLS-cooperating agency is unavailable, the
Department proposes to continue to allow State agencies to provide
alternate data sources or methods.
Tribal Leaders also discussed the need for proactive guidance on
new exceptions for ``Indians'', ``Urban Indians'', and ``California
Indians'' under the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA). One
comment noted that the IHCIA definitions do not fully align with
definitions in the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (the Act) or Tribal
enrollment processes. FNA will work to provide technical assistance on
these new exceptions and welcomes specific suggestions on opportunities
to align definitions. One comment also requested FNA clarify that the
exceptions apply regardless of residence on Reservation lands. FNA
affirms that individuals must only meet the IHCIA definitions; there is
no further requirement to live on Reservation lands.
Similarly, Tribal Leaders expressed concern about the risk of
burdensome verification requirements and stressed the need to
coordinate with Tribal Nations and federal agencies to streamline and
allow flexibility for verification of Tribal status. As a reminder,
State agencies must follow verification rules per 7 CFR 273.2(f) and
273.24(l), including verifying information if questionable and
accepting multiple forms of documentation. FNA will also take further
comments on specific ways to improve verification processes.
Additionally, Tribal Leaders expressed that State agencies should
be required to provide notice of the changes and requested outreach
funding for providing culturally appropriate information to Tribal
members. Under
[[Page 72447]]
existing rules at 7 CFR 273.7(c)(1), State agencies must notify SNAP
applicants and participants of exceptions from the time limit, which
includes the exceptions for Indians, Urban Indians, and California
Indians. Also, FNA encourages State agencies to conduct outreach to
Tribal populations on such changes. Such outreach costs are allowable
administrative costs eligible for partial reimbursement under Section
16 of the Act.
Additionally, Tribal Leaders expressed concern that the One Big
Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 removes exceptions for older adults,
veterans, and those aging out of foster care from meeting work
requirements, which may lead to the ineligibility of some Tribal
members currently participating in SNAP. While FNA recognizes this
impact, these area statutory provisions required under the OBBB, and
therefore, cannot be changed by this rulemaking. Additionally, FNA
expects many of these individuals will retain eligibility due to the
new exception from the time limit for individuals who meet the
definition of ``Indian'', ``Urban Indian'', or ``California Indian''
under the IHCIA.
Lastly, Tribal Leaders expressed continued interest in Tribal
administration of SNAP and voiced their support of SNAP being added to
the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act to allow
Tribes to self-administer the program. While FNA appreciates this
feedback, this would be a statutory change and tribal administration of
SNAP is beyond the scope of the proposed rule. In addition to the
comments submitted during this consultation period, the Department will
also consider written comments submitted during the proposed rule
public comment period. If a Tribe requests further consultation in the
future, FNA will work with the Office of Tribal Relations to ensure
meaningful consultation is provided.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chap. 35; 5 CFR
1320) requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approve all
collections of information by a Federal agency before they can be
implemented. Respondents are not required to respond to any collection
of information unless it displays a current valid OMB control number.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this proposed
rule would contain information collections that are subject to review
and approval by the Office of Management and Budget; therefore, the
Department is submitting for public comment the changes in the
information collection burden that would result from adoption of the
proposals in the rule. These burden estimates are contingent upon OMB
approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. When the final
rulemaking information collection request is approved, the Department
will publish a separate notice in the Federal Register announcing OMB's
approval.
Comments on this proposed rule must be received by December 10,
2026. Send comments to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for FNA, Washington, DC 20403, Fax: 202-
395-7285, or email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a0cfc9d2c1ffd3d5c2cdc9d3d3c9cfcee0cfcdc28ec5cfd08ec7cfd6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1a7573687b45696f78777369697375745a757778347f756a347d756c">[email protected]</span></a>. Please also send a
copy of your comments to the SNAP Program Development Division at the
Food and Nutrition Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 5601
Sunnyside Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705. For further information please
contact the SNAP Program Development Division, at the above address.
Comments on this proposed rule must be received by December 10,
2026. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who
are to respond, including use of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms
of information technology.
All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the
request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of
public record.
Title: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Work Requirements
and Screening.
OMB Number: 0584-0479.
Expiration Date: 7/31/2028.
Type of Request: Revision to an existing collection.
Abstract: The proposed rule would amend SNAP regulations to
implement changes made by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB). Some
of the changes would modify current regulations resulting in an
increase in the reporting burden for State agencies and individuals,
while others will result in no change.
The OBBB changed who is subject to the time limit. The Department
estimates the changes to the age-based exception, dependent child
exception, and FRA exceptions will result in an increase in the number
of individuals subject to the time limit. Conversely, the new
exceptions for individuals who are an ``Indian'', ``Urban Indian'', or
``California Indian'' will result in a slight decrease in individuals
subject to the time limit. The Department anticipates these changes
will result in additional State agency and household burden related to
verification of work hours and countable months, as well as issuance
and review of the Consolidated Work Notice, including oral explanation
of the work requirements for individuals newly subject to the time
limit. The Department further anticipates additional burden related to
the issuance and review of the Notice of Adverse Action for individuals
newly subject to the time limit who reach three countable months and
are disqualified from SNAP. Additionally, the Department estimates the
proposed rule will increase the burden related to screening, as more
individuals must now be screened for exceptions from the time limit.
The OBBB also changed the criteria for qualifying for a waiver of
the time limit. In addition to codifying USDA's regulatory
implementation of these statutory changes to waiver criteria, this
proposed rule would make changes to criteria for waivers of the time
limit to define area and requirements for supporting data at 7 CFR
273.24(f) to ensure waivers reflect recent, sustained, and accurate
unemployment rates. The Department estimates fewer State agencies will
qualify for and request waivers of the time limit, leading to a
decrease in State agency burden related to the preparation and
submission of waiver requests. The Department estimates these changes
will reduce the number of individuals covered by a waiver, resulting in
additional State agency and household burden related to verification of
work hours and countable months, issuance and review of the
Consolidated Work Notice, and oral explanation of the work requirements
for individuals newly subject to the time limit. The Department also
anticipates additional burden related to the issuance and review of the
Notice of Adverse Action for individuals newly subject to the time
limit who reach three countable months and are disqualified.
The OBBB establishes a new, temporary type of exemption for
noncontiguous States, referred to as ``good faith exemptions.'' The
Department may approve a State agency request to exempt individuals in
Alaska
[[Page 72448]]
and Hawaii from the time limit upon determination that the State agency
is demonstrating a good faith effort to comply with the time limit
requirements. This proposed rule would codify USDA's regulatory
implementation of good faith exemptions, resulting in an increase in
State agency burden related to the preparation and submission of a good
faith exemption request.
The rule would also revert the definition of ``homeless
individual'' at 7 CFR 271.2 to the language prior to the final rule
``Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Program Purpose and Work
Requirements Provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023'' (89
FR 102342). The Department does not anticipate any burden related to
this change.
The Department anticipates start-up burden related to these
statutory and regulatory changes. State agencies need to update their
eligibility systems and notices to include the new exceptions and
changes to the age-based exception. State agencies also need to update
their policy manuals and documents with the changes to eligibility and
the screening requirements for time-limited participants. Lastly, State
agencies need to develop and provide training on the new requirements
to State agency staff.
The new burden requirements for this rule require a revision to OMB
Control Number: 0584-0479 (expiration date: 7/31/2028), which currently
covers burden related to preparation and submission of time limit
waivers, screening for the work requirements, and changes made by the
FRA. The proposed rule would increase the burden covered under OMB
Control Number 0584-0479. Additionally, the Department is making an
adjustment to the burden related to screening to reflect more recent
estimates of the number of time-limited participants, as well as
updates to cost estimates based on more recent data on labor rates.
State agencies submit time limit waivers via the Waiver Information
Management System (WIMS), and the burden for this submission is covered
which is covered under OMB Control Number 0584-0083 (Operating
Guidelines, Forms, Waivers, Program and Budget Summary Statement;
expiration date: 9/30/2026). The proposed rule would not make changes
to burden covered under OMB Control Number 0584-0083.
Start-Up Burden
Respondents: State Agencies.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 53 State Agencies.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: One (1) response.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 649,936 hours, an
increase of 649,936 hours from current inventory of zero (0) hours in
0584-0479.
Ongoing Burden
Respondents: State Agencies and Individuals.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 53 State Agencies and 43,822,617
Individuals.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 824,792 responses per
State Agency and 1 per Individual.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 6,163,351 hours
(3,082,075 hours for State Agencies and 3,081,275 hours for
Individuals), an increase of 2,131,335 hours from current inventory of
4,032,015 hours in 0584-0479.
The total burden for this rulemaking is 6,813,287 burden hours and
87,536,636 annual responses. The total burden for adjustments in this
revision is 341,933 burden hours and 336,415 annual responses. This
results in an increase to the burden hours for OMB Control Number 0584-
0479, resulting in a total inventory of 4,133,782 burden hours and
61,090,148 annual responses.
This represents an increase to the burden hours for OMB Control
Number 0584-0479, resulting in a total inventory of 6,813,287 burden
hours (2,781,272 new burden hours + 4,032,015 existing burden hours)
and 87,536,636 responses (27,873,701 new responses + 59,662,935
existing responses).
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
[[Page 72449]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10NO26.081
[[Page 72450]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10NO26.082
[[Page 72451]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10NO26.083
[[Page 72452]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10NO26.084
BILLING CODE 3410-30-C
[[Page 72453]]
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 271
Administrative practice and procedures, Employment, Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program.
7 CFR Part 273
Administrative practice and procedure, Employment, Indian
Reservations, Time limit, U.S. Territories, Waivers, Work requirements.
Accordingly, the Food and Nutrition Administration proposes to
amend 7 CFR parts 271 and 273 as follows:
PART 271--GENERAL INFORMATION AND DEFINITIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 271 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2011-2036.
0
2. In Sec. 271.2, revise the definition of ``homeless individual'' to
read as follows:
Sec. 271.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Homeless individual means an individual who lacks a fixed and
regular nighttime residence or an individual whose primary nighttime
residence is:
(1) A supervised shelter designed to provide temporary
accommodations (such as a welfare hotel or congregate shelter);
(2) A halfway house or similar institution that provides temporary
residence for individuals intended to be institutionalized;
(3) A temporary accommodation for not more than 90 days in the
residence of another individual; or
(4) A public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used,
as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings (a hallway, a bus
station, a lobby, or similar places).
* * * * *
PART 273--CERTIFICATION OF ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOLDS
0
3. The authority citation for part 273 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2011-2036.
0
4. Amend Sec. 273.24 by revising the section heading, paragraphs
(a)(5), (c), and (f), and adding paragraph (m) to read as follows:
0
5. Revise the title to read ``SNAP Time Limit''
0
6. In Sec. 273.24, add paragraph (a)(5).
0
7. In Sec. 273.24, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows.
0
8. In Sec. 273.24, revise paragraph (f) to read as follows.
0
9. In Sec. 273.24, add paragraph (m).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 273.24 SNAP Time Limit.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(5) Noncontiguous State means a State agency other than the
contiguous 48 States, the District of Columbia, Guam, and the U.S.
Virgin Islands.
* * * * *
(c) Exceptions. The time limit does not apply to an individual if
he or she is:
(1) Under 18 or 65 years of age or older;
(2) Determined by the State agency to be medically certified as
physically or mentally unfit for employment. An individual is medically
certified as physically or mentally unfit for employment if he or she:
(i) Is receiving temporary or permanent disability benefits issued
by governmental or private sources;
(ii) Is obviously mentally or physically unfit for employment as
determined by the State agency; or
(iii) If the unfitness is not obvious, provides a statement from a
physician, physician's assistant, nurse, nurse practitioner, designated
representative of the physician's office, a licensed or certified
psychologist, a social worker, or any other medical personnel the State
agency determines appropriate, that he or she is physically or mentally
unfit for employment.
(3) Is a parent (natural, adoptive, or step) of a household member
under age 14, even if the household member who is under 14 is not
himself eligible for SNAP benefits;
(4) Is residing in a household where a household member is under
age 14, even if the household member who is under 14 is not himself
eligible for SNAP benefits;
(5) Is otherwise exempt from work requirements under section
6(d)(2) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as implemented in
regulations at Sec. 273.7(b)(1)(ii) through (vii);
(6) Is pregnant;
(7) an Indian or an Urban Indian (as such terms are defined in
paragraphs (13) and (28) of section 4 of the Indian Health Care
Improvement Act); or
(8) a California Indian described in section 809(a) of the Indian
Health Care Improvement Act.
* * * * *
(f) Waivers--(1) General. The State agency, with the support of the
chief executive officer of the State, may request FNA approval to
temporarily waive the time limit for a group of individuals in the
State in the area in which the individuals reside. To be considered for
approval, the request must be supported by corresponding data or
evidence demonstrating that the requested area:
(i) Has an unemployment rate of over 10 percent; or
(ii) is in a noncontiguous State and has an unemployment rate that
is at or above 1.5 times the national unemployment rate.
(2) Required Data. FNA may approve waiver requests under paragraphs
(f)(1)(i) and (ii) supported by any one of the following:
(i) Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) or a BLS-
cooperating agency that shows an area has a recent 12-month average
unemployment rate over 10 percent; or
(ii) Data from the BLS or a BLS-cooperating agency that shows an
area in a noncontiguous State has a recent 12-month average
unemployment rate at or above 1.5 times the national unemployment rate.
(3) Other data and evidence in an exceptional circumstance. FNA may
approve waiver requests that are supported by data or evidence other
than those listed under paragraph (f)(2) of this section if the request
demonstrates an exceptional circumstance in an area. The request must
demonstrate that the exceptional circumstance is accompanied by an
unemployment rate over 10 percent or at or over 1.5 times the national
average for noncontiguous States. For example, this may include data
from the BLS or a BLS-cooperating agency that shows an area has a most
recent three-month average unemployment rate meeting the required
threshold. In addition, the request must demonstrate that the impact of
the exceptional circumstance is ongoing at the time of the request.
Supporting unemployment data provided by the State must rely on
standard BLS data or methods, if available.
(4) Areas with limited data or evidence. Waiver requests for an
area for which standard BLS data or data from a BLS-cooperating agency
is limited or unavailable, such as a reservation area or U.S.
Territory, must meet criteria in (f)(1) but, are not required to
conform to
[[Page 72454]]
the criteria for approval under paragraphs (f)(2), (3), and (6) of this
section. The supporting data or evidence provided by the State must be
recent and must correspond to the requested area. FNA may approve
waivers for these areas if the requests are supported by sufficient
data or evidence, such as estimated unemployment rates based on
available data from BLS and the U.S. Census Bureau.
(5) Definition of area. For the purposes of subsection (f),
``area'' means:
(i) A Commuting Zone recognized by the Economic Research Service
(ERS);
(ii) A county or county-equivalent;
(iii) A reservation area or a U.S. Territory.
(6) Areas that cross State borders. Although Commuting Zones and
reservation areas may cross State borders, the State agency may only
request a waiver for areas within its State geographic boundaries.
However, such a waiver request may be supported by data representative
of the area within its State boundaries or the entire interstate area.
For example, although the Commuting Zone for Memphis, Tennessee,
includes counties in Mississippi and Arkansas, Tennessee may only
request a waiver for the portion of the Commuting Zone within Tennessee
borders. To support such a waiver request, Tennessee may submit data
reflecting the Commuting Zone portion within Tennessee or the entire
Commuting Zone.
(7) Rules for combining data to group substate areas. The State
agency may only combine data from individual localities to assess
unemployment rates for an area described in (f)(5)(i) or (iii).
(8) Duration of waiver approvals. In general, FNA will approve
waivers for one year. FNA may approve waivers for a shorter period at
the State agency's request.
(9) Agency discretion. FNA reserves the right to deny requests to
waive the time limit when contrary, recent, readily-accessible, and
robust evidence pertaining to the employment prospects for time-limited
adults in the requested area is available.
* * * * *
(m) Good faith effort determination. The Secretary may approve a
request from a noncontiguous State to exempt individuals from the time
limit if the Secretary determines that the State agency is
demonstrating a good faith effort to implement the time limit
requirements.
(1) The State agency must submit a request to use such exemptions
which describes:
(i) Any actions taken by the State agency toward compliance with
the time limit requirements;
(ii) Any significant barriers to or challenges in meeting those
requirements, including barriers or challenges relating to funding,
design, development, procurement, or installation of necessary systems
or resources;
(iii) The State agency's detailed plan and timeline for achieving
full compliance with those requirements, including key milestones;
(iv) The State agency's plan for tracking and analyzing performance
metrics for cases subject to the time limit, such as quality control
metrics, timeliness rates, and other metrics as appropriate; and
(v) The State agency's plan for which individuals in the State it
would exempt if the Secretary approves such exemptions under paragraph
(m).
(2) Duration of exemption. Exemptions granted under paragraph (m)
expire no later than December 31, 2028, and may not be renewed beyond
that date.
(3) Early termination. The Secretary may terminate approval for
exemptions granted under paragraph (m) prior to the expiration date of
that exemption if the Secretary determines that the State agency:
(i) Has failed to comply with the reporting requirements described
in subparagraph (4); or
(ii) Based on the information provided in such reports, has failed
to make continued good faith efforts toward compliance with the time
limit requirements.
(4) Reporting requirements. A State agency granted an exemption
under subparagraph (m) must submit to the Secretary:
(i) Quarterly progress reports on the status of the State agency in
achieving the milestones toward full compliance described in paragraph
(1)(iii) of this section; and
(ii) Information on specific risks or newly identified barriers or
challenges to full compliance, including the State agency's plan to
mitigate those risks, barriers, or challenges.
Shiela Corley,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2026-22944 Filed 11-9-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on November 10, 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.