Comment on FR Doc # 2011-20786

This response will address the Department’s proposed definition of “substantial” as it relates to the number of households that have been over issued Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. The need for clarification in this area is essential for both program administrators and facilitators. Eliminating the current ambiguity is as essential as developing a method for identifying when these errors occur. The Department elected not to base “substantial” on a specific number of households, but rather on the average percentage of over issuances for all States. In order to set a benchmark for all States, the Department is proposing eight percent as a “substantial” number of households, which was based on the current national average error rate of seven percent for all States. While the Department’s proposal of defining “substantial” at eight percent of households seems equitable, actual percent variables from State to State could be quite different. Using the percentage average of all States does not take into consideration the States that currently average more or less than an eight percent error rate each year. In the case of a State that averages a 10 percent error rate each year, eight percent would not be considered “substantial” and the error might not be detected. Consideration should be given to calculating each States’ error rate individually, rather than on the National average. When a State implements or modifies its information technology system, the benchmark percentage should be based on that individual State’s actual error rate for the year prior to implementation. This method would ensure that if there is a “substantial” error it would be detected based on that State’s prior error rate history.