November 23, 2007

Kenneth R. Payne, Chief

Marketing Programs, Livestock and Seed Program

AMS-USDA, Room 2628-S

STOP 0251

1400 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20250-0251

Mr. Payne:

I want to thank you and all your staff for getting the proposed order
published in the *Federal Register.* I am writing in support of the
proposed national sorghum checkoff as president of the National Sorghum
Producers (NSP) and as a grain sorghum producer from Monte Alto, Texas.
This letter is being submitted in reference to Docket No.
AMS-LS-07-0056; LS-07-02 which was published in the *Federal Register*
on November 23, 2007 on page number 65842.

After reviewing the document, I have the following recommendations for
changing specific text in the proposed Order. My first suggestion is a
change in the text in §1221.116. The maximum modification of the
assessment rate for grain sorghum should be changed from "1" to ".4" in
§1221.116(c)(1). The maximum modification of the assessment rate for
forage sorghum should be changed from "1" to ".65" in §1221.116(c)(2).
This will cap both rates at 1.0%. From reading the full section, I
believe this change in the proposed text submitted by NSP was made to
improve readability, but it inadvertently raised the cap on the
assessment rates.

My second suggestion is in §1221.104(c)(5). Due to the elimination of
the definition of "unit" in the proposed text, this paragraph needs to
have the following sentence added: "At-large national representatives
shall also have their staggered terms assigned by the Secretary."

In §1221.117(a) and (b), the ";" (semicolon) needs to be removed after
the wording "1,000 bushels of grain sorghum." The current wording does
not require the ";" as did the originally submitted text.

In §1221.123, a section reference is given concerning disposition of
property after termination of the subpart. This reference should be to
§1221.132. The reference, as printed in the published notice, was not
adjusted after §1221.106 (Removal) was added during the editing process
by USDA.

In §1221.130(b)(3), the wording should be changed to "and importers"
from "or importers." Given the small number of importers, a proposed
order allowing only 10% to call for a referendum would allow for one
importer to call for a national referendum. A call for a national
referendum should be based on 10% of both producers **and** importers.
This will also make it consistent with §1221.131(b).

In, §1221.130(c), the wording "and importers" needs to be inserted after
the words "sorghum producers." This will make it consistent with the
changes requested in §1221.130(b)(3) as well as with §1221.131(b).

Finally, in §1221.100(f), the original text submitted by NSP contained a
"no amendment clause" that would have allowed, for the purpose of
equitable importer representation, the changing of nomination and
appointment procedures without amending the Order. This clause was
deleted by USDA, but another clause was added in §1221.110(m) that
allows the Board "to make rules and regulations to effectuate the terms
and provisions of this subpart." If USDA's intent in the revision of
§1221.110(m) is to allow for such changes without amending the Order,
then these changes are supported. I only hope to convey that NSP sees no
reason to amend the Order when only changing procedures for equitable
importer representation.

Again, I support the national sorghum checkoff and thank you for the
opportunity to submit these comments.

Sincerely,

![](media/image2.png){width="2.6597222222222223in"
height="0.5152777777777777in"}

Dale Murden, President