18422 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1260 

[No. AMS–LS–10–0086] 

Beef Promotion and Research; 

Reapportionment 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

adjust representation on the Cattlemen’s 

Beef Promotion and Research Board 

(Board), established under the Beef 

Promotion and Research Act of 1985 

(Act), to reflect changes in cattle 

inventories and cattle and beef imports 

that have occurred since the most recent 

Board reapportionment rule became 

effective in October 2008. These 

adjustments are required by the Beef 

Promotion and Research Order (Order) 

and would result in a decrease in Board 

membership from 106 to 103, effective 

with the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture’s (USDA) appointments for 

terms beginning early in the year 2012. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received by May 4, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Comments must be posted 

online at http://www.regulations.gov or 

sent to Craig Shackelford, Marketing 

Programs Branch, Livestock and Seed 

Program, Agricultural Marketing 

Service, USDA, Room 2628–S, STOP 

0251, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20250–0251; or fax to 

(202) 720–1125. All comments should 

reference the docket number, the date, 

and the page number of this issue of the 

Federal Register. Comments will be 

available for public inspection at the 

aforementioned address, as well as on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov/. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Craig Shackelford, Marketing Programs 

Branch, on 202/720–1115, fax 202/720– 

1125, or by e-mail at 

craig.shackelford@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has waived the review process 

required by Executive Order 12866 for 

this action. 

Executive Order 12988 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. It is not intended to 

have retroactive effect. 

Section 11 of the Act provides that 

nothing in the Act may be construed to 

preempt or supersede any other program 

relating to beef promotion organized 

and operated under the laws of the 

United States or any State. There are no 

administrative proceedings that must be 

exhausted prior to any judicial 

challenge to the provisions of this rule. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act and 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Pursuant to the requirements set forth 

in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), the Administrator of 

the Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS) has considered the economic 

effect of this action on small entities and 

has determined that this proposed rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. The purpose of RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

businesses subject to such actions in 

order that small businesses will not be 

unduly burdened. 

In the February 2010 publication of 

‘‘Farms, Land in Farms, and Livestock 

Operations,’’ USDA’s National 

Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) 

estimates that in 2009 the number of 

operations in the United States with 

cattle totaled approximately 950,000. 

The majority of these operations that are 

subject to the Order may be classified as 

small entities. 

The proposed rule imposes no new 

burden on the industry. It only adjusts 

representation on the Board to reflect 

changes in domestic cattle inventory 

and cattle and beef imports. The 

adjustments are required by the Order 

and would result in a decrease in Board 

membership from 106 to 103. 

Background and Proposed Action 

The Board was initially appointed 

August 4, 1986, pursuant to the 

provisions of the Act (7 U.S.C. 2901– 

2911) and the Order issued thereunder. 

Domestic representation on the Board is 

based on cattle inventory numbers, and 

importer representation is based on the 

conversion of the volume of imported 

cattle, beef, or beef products into live 

animal equivalencies. 

Section 1260.141(b) of the Order 

provides that the Board shall be 

composed of cattle producers and 

importers appointed by the Department 

from nominations submitted by certified 

producer organizations. A producer may 

only be nominated to represent the unit 

in which that producer is a resident. 

Section 1260.141(c) of the Order 

provides that at least every 3 years and 

not more than every 2 years, the Board 

shall review the geographic distribution 

of cattle inventories throughout the 

United States and the volume of 

imported cattle, beef, and beef products 

and, if warranted, shall reapportion 

units and/or modify the number of 

Board members from units in order to 

reflect the geographic distribution of 

cattle production volume in the United 

States and the volume of cattle, beef, or 

beef products imported into the United 

States. 

Section 1260.141(d) of the Order 

authorizes the Board to recommend to 

the Department modifications to the 

number of cattle per unit necessary for 

representation on the Board. 

Section 1260.141(e)(1) provides that 

each geographic unit or State that 

includes a total cattle inventory equal to 

or greater than 500,000 head of cattle 

shall be entitled to one representative 

on the Board. Section 1260.141(e)(2) 

provides that States that do not have 

total cattle inventories equal to or 

greater than 500,000 head shall be 

grouped, to the extent practicable, into 

geographically-contiguous units, each of 

which have a combined total inventory 

of not less than 500,000 head. Such 

grouped units are entitled to at least one 

representative on the Board. Each unit 

that has an additional 1 million head of 

cattle within a unit qualifies for 

additional representation on the Board 

as provided in § 1260.141(e)(4). As 

provided in § 1260.141(e)(3), importers 

are represented by a single unit, with 

the number of Board members based on 

a conversion of the total volume of 

imported cattle, beef, or beef products 

into live animal equivalencies. 

The initial Board appointed in 1986 

was composed of 113 members. 

Reapportionment, based on a 3-year 

average of cattle inventory numbers and 

import data, reduced the Board to 111 

members in 1990 and 107 members in 

1993 before the Board was increased to 

111 members in 1996. The Board was 

decreased to 110 members in 1999, 108 

members in 2001, 104 members in 2005, 

and increased to 106 members in 2009. 

This proposal would, when finalized, 

decrease the number of Board members 

from 106 to 103 with appointments for 

terms effective early in 2012. 

The current Board representation by 

States or units was based on an average 

of the January 1, 2005, 2006, and 2007, 

inventory of cattle in the various States 

as reported by NASS. Current importer 

representation was based on a combined 

total average of the 2005, 2006, and 

2007 live cattle imports as published by 

USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service 

and the average of the 2004, 2005, and 

2006 live animal equivalents for 

imported beef products. 

In considering reapportionment, the 

Board reviewed cattle inventories as 

well as cattle, beef, and beef product 

import data for the period of January 1, 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 18423 

2008, to January 1, 2010. The Board 

recommended that a 3-year average of 

cattle inventories and import numbers 

should be continued. The Board 

determined that an average of the 

January 1, 2008, 2009, and 2010, cattle 

inventory numbers would best reflect 

the number of cattle in each State or 

unit since publication of the last 

reapportionment rule published in 2008 

(73 FR 60097). 

The Board reviewed data published 

by the USDA’s Economic Research 

Service to determine proper importer 

representation. The Board 

recommended the use of a combined 

total of the average of the 2008, 2009, 

and 2010, cattle import data and the 

average of the 2007, 2008, and 2009, live 

animal equivalents for imported beef 

products. The method used to calculate 

the total number of live animal 

equivalents was the same as that used 

in the previous reapportionment of the 

Board. The live animal equivalent 

weight was changed in 2006 from 509 

pounds to 592 pounds. 

The Board’s recommended 

reapportionment plan would decrease 

the number of representatives on the 

Board from 106 to 103. From the Board’s 

analysis of USDA cattle inventories and 

import equivalencies, Kansas, Nebraska, 

Nevada, and the Southeast Region 

would each lose one Board seat. 

Montana would gain a Board seat. The 

importers would lose two Board seats. 

The Board has recommended that the 

Southeast Region be expanded to 

include Alabama, permitting the new 

unit three Board members. According to 

the Board analysis, Nevada would lose 

its representation on the Board. 

However, the Board also proposed that 

California and Nevada be combined to 

form a Southwest unit. 

The States and units affected by the 

reapportionment plan and the current 

and proposed member representation 

per unit are as follows: 

State/unit Current 

representation 

Revised 

representation 

Kansas .............................................................................................................................................................. 7 6. 

Nebraska ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 6. 

Nevada .............................................................................................................................................................. 1 0. 

Southeast .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 3 (lost one seat 

but added a 

seat with Alabama joining 

the unit). 

Importers ........................................................................................................................................................... 9 7. 

Montana ............................................................................................................................................................ 2 3. 

Southwest Unit .................................................................................................................................................. N/A 6 (California and 

Nevada). 

The 2012 nomination and 

appointment process was not in 

progress while the Board was 

developing its recommendations. Thus, 

the Board reapportionment as proposed 

by this rulemaking would be effective, 

if adopted, with appointments that will 

be effective early in the year 2012. 

A 30-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposal. Thirty days is deemed 

appropriate to facilitate the adjustment 

of the representation on the Board, 

which is required by the Order at least 

every 3 years, and not more than every 

2 years. To permit timely execution of 

the annual nomination and appointment 

process, publication of a subsequent 

final rule must occur as soon as 

practical. 

It is found that good cause exists to 

provide a 30 day comment period after 

the date of publication in the Federal 

Register because the Beef Promotion 

and Research Program would benefit by 

having this rule in effect as soon as 

possible for the Board appointments 

that will be effective early in the year 

2012. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1260 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Advertising, Agricultural 

research, Imports, Marketing agreement, 

Meat and meat products, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

For reasons set forth in the preamble, 

it is proposed that 7 CFR part 1260 be 

amended as follows: 

PART 1260—BEEF PROMOTION AND 

RESEARCH 

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 1260 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2901–2911 and 7 

U.S.C. 7401. 

2. In § 1260.141, paragraph (a) and the 

table immediately following it, are 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 1260.141 Membership of Board. 

(a) Beginning with the 2011 Board 

nominations and the associated 

appointments effective early in the year 

2012, the United States shall be divided 

into 37 geographical units and, 1 unit 

representing importers, for a total of 38 

units. The number of Board members 

from each unit shall be as follows: 

CATTLE AND CALVES 1

State/unit (1,000 Head) Directors 

1. Arizona ..................................................................................................................................................................... 983 1 

2. Arkansas .................................................................................................................................................................. 1,837 2 

3. Colorado .................................................................................................................................................................. 2,650 3 

4. Florida ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,710 2 

5. Idaho ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2,153 2 

6. Illinois ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1,200 1 

7. Indiana ..................................................................................................................................................................... 873 1 

8. Iowa ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3,933 4 

9. Kansas ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6,317 6 

10. Kentucky ................................................................................................................................................................ 2,333 2 

11. Louisiana ............................................................................................................................................................... 873 1 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

18424 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

CATTLE AND CALVES 1—Continued 

State/unit (1,000 Head) Directors 

12. Michigan ................................................................................................................................................................ 1,080 1 

13. Minnesota .............................................................................................................................................................. 2,407 2 

14. Mississippi ............................................................................................................................................................. 957 1 

15. Missouri ................................................................................................................................................................. 4,217 4 

16. Montana ................................................................................................................................................................. 2,583 3 

17. Nebraska ............................................................................................................................................................... 6,350 6 

18. New Mexico ........................................................................................................................................................... 1,540 2 

19. New York ............................................................................................................................................................... 1,410 1 

20. North Carolina ....................................................................................................................................................... 833 1 

21. North Dakota ......................................................................................................................................................... 1,763 2 

22. Ohio ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1,270 1 

23. Oklahoma .............................................................................................................................................................. 5,417 5 

24. Oregon ................................................................................................................................................................... 1,290 1 

25. Pennsylvania ......................................................................................................................................................... 1,607 2 

26. South Dakota ......................................................................................................................................................... 3,733 4 

27. Tennessee ............................................................................................................................................................. 2,040 2 

28. Texas ..................................................................................................................................................................... 13,500 14 

29. Utah ....................................................................................................................................................................... 820 1 

30. Virginia ................................................................................................................................................................... 1,530 2 

31. Wisconsin .............................................................................................................................................................. 3,367 3 

32. Wyoming ................................................................................................................................................................ 1,327 1 

33. Northwest ............................................................................................................................................................... ........................ 1 

Alaska ................................................................................................................................................................... 15 ....................

Hawaii ................................................................................................................................................................... 151 ....................

Washington ........................................................................................................................................................... 1,070 ....................

Total ............................................................................................................................................................... 1,236 ....................

34. Northeast ............................................................................................................................................................... ........................ 1 

Connecticut ........................................................................................................................................................... 50 ....................

Delaware ............................................................................................................................................................... 21 ....................

Maine .................................................................................................................................................................... 88 ....................

Massachusetts ...................................................................................................................................................... 44 ....................

New Hampshire .................................................................................................................................................... 38 ....................

New Jersey ........................................................................................................................................................... 37 ....................

Rhode Island ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 ....................

Vermont ................................................................................................................................................................ 267 ....................

Total ............................................................................................................................................................... 550 ....................

35. Mid-Atlantic ............................................................................................................................................................ ........................ 1 

Maryland ............................................................................................................................................................... 192 ....................

West Virginia ........................................................................................................................................................ 400 ....................

Total ............................................................................................................................................................... 592 ....................

36. Southeast ............................................................................................................................................................... ........................ 3 

Alabama ................................................................................................................................................................ 1,253 ....................

Georgia ................................................................................................................................................................. 1,100 ....................

South Carolina ...................................................................................................................................................... 385 ....................

Total ............................................................................................................................................................... 2,738 ....................

37. Southwest .............................................................................................................................................................. ........................ 6 

California ............................................................................................................................................................... 5,283 ....................

Nevada ................................................................................................................................................................. 450 ....................

Total ............................................................................................................................................................... 5,733 ....................

38. Importer 2 ............................................................................................................................................................... 6,887 7 

1 2008, 2009, and 2010 average of January 1 cattle inventory data. 

2 2007, 2008, and 2009 average of annual import data. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 18425 

1The Report on the 2008 analysis is available on 

the DOE Web site at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ 

buildings/appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/ 

five_lamp_types_report.pdf. 

* * * * * 

Dated: March 29, 2011. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7826 Filed 4–1–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2011–BT–NOA–0013] 

Energy Conservation Program: Data 

Collection and Comparison With 

Forecasted Unit Sales of Five Lamp 

Types 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of data availability. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) is informing the public of 

its collection of shipment data and 

creation of spreadsheet models to 

provide comparisons between actual 

and benchmark estimate unit sales of 

five lamp types (i.e., rough service 

lamps, vibration service lamps, 3-way 

incandescent lamps, 2,601–3,300 lumen 

general service incandescent lamps, and 

shatter-resistant lamps), which are 

currently exempt from energy 

conservation standards. As the actual 

sales do not exceed the forecasted 

estimate by 100 percent for any lamp 

type (i.e., the threshold triggering 

rulemaking for an energy conservation 

standard for that lamp type has not been 

exceeded), DOE has determined that no 

regulatory action is necessary at this 

time. However, DOE will continue to 

track sales data for these exempted 

lamps. Relating to this activity, DOE has 

prepared and is making available on its 

Web site a spreadsheet showing the 

comparisons of anticipated versus 

actual sales, as well as the model used 

to generate the original sales estimates. 

The spreadsheet is available at: http:// 

www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/residential/ 

five_lamp_types.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Tina Kaarsberg, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1393. E-mail: 

Tina.Kaarsberg@ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–9507. E-mail: 

Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Definitions 

A. Rough Service Lamps 

B. Vibration Service Lamps 

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps 

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service 

Incandescent Lamps 

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps 

III. Comparison Methodology 

IV. Comparison Results 

A. Rough Service Lamps 

B. Vibration Service Lamps 

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps 

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service 

Incandescent Lamps 

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps 

V. Conclusion 

I. Background 

The Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) (Pub. 

L. 110–140) was enacted on December 

19, 2007. Among the requirements of 

subtitle B (Lighting Energy Efficiency) of 

title III of EISA 2007 were provisions 

directing the U.S. Department of Energy 

(DOE) to collect, analyze, and monitor 

unit sales of five lamp types (i.e., rough 

service lamps, vibration service lamps, 

3-way incandescent lamps, 2,601–3,300 

lumen general service incandescent 

lamps, and shatter-resistant lamps). In 

relevant part, section 321(a)(3)(B) of 

EISA 2007 amended section 325(l) of 

the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 

of 1975 (EPCA) by adding paragraph 

(4)(B) which generally directs DOE, in 

consultation with the National Electrical 

Manufacturers Association (NEMA), to: 

(1) Collect unit sales data for each of the 

five lamp types for calendar years 1990 

through 2006 in order to determine the 

historical growth rate for each lamp 

type; and (2) construct a model for each 

of the five lamp types based on 

coincident economic indicators that 

closely match the historical annual 

growth rates of each lamp type to 

provide a neutral comparison 

benchmark estimate of future unit sales. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(B)) Section 

321(a)(3)(B) of EISA 2007 also amends 

section 325(l) of EPCA by adding 

paragraph (4)(C), which in relevant part, 

directs DOE to collect unit sales data for 

calendar years 2010 through 2025, in 

consultation with NEMA, for each of the 

five lamp types. DOE must then 

compare the actual lamp sales in that 

year with the benchmark estimate, 

determine if the unit sales projection 

has been exceeded, and issue the 

findings within 90 days after the end of 

the analyzed calendar year. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(l)(4)(C)) 

On December 18, 2008, DOE issued a 

notice of data availability for the Report 

on Data Collection and Estimated 

Future Unit Sales of Five Lamp Types 

(hereafter ‘‘the 2008 analysis’’) 1 which 

was published in the Federal Register 

on December 24, 2008. 73 FR 79072. 

The 2008 analysis presented the 1990 

through 2006 shipment data collected in 

consultation with NEMA, the 

spreadsheet model DOE constructed for 

each lamp type, and the benchmark unit 

sales estimate for 2010 through 2025. 

Today’s NODA presents the first of the 

mandated follow-up comparisons. 

Section IV of this report compares the 

actual unit sales against benchmark unit 

sales estimates for 2010. 

EISA 2007 also amends section 325(l) 

of EPCA by adding paragraphs (4)(D) 

through (4)(H) which state that if DOE 

finds that the unit sales for a given lamp 

type in any year between 2010 and 2025 

exceed the benchmark estimate of unit 

sales by at least 100 percent (i.e., more 

than double the anticipated sales), then 

DOE must take regulatory action to 

establish an energy conservation 

standard for such lamps. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(l)(4)(D)–(H)) For 2,601–3,300 

lumen general service incandescent 

lamps, DOE must adopt a statutorilyprescribed energy conservation 

standard, and for the other four types of 

lamps, the statute requires DOE to 

initiate an accelerated rulemaking to 

establish energy conservation standards. 

If the Secretary does not complete the 

accelerated rulemakings within one year 

of the end of the previous calendar year, 

there is a ‘‘backstop requirement’’ for 

each lamp type, which would establish 

energy conservation standard levels and 

related requirements by statute. Id. 

As in the 2008 analysis, in this 

NODA, DOE uses manufacturer 

shipments as a surrogate for unit sales, 

because manufacturer shipment data is 

tracked and aggregated by the trade 

organization, NEMA. DOE believes that 

annual shipments track closely with 

actual unit sales of these five lamp 

types, as DOE presumes that retailer 

inventories remain constant from year to 

year. DOE believes this is a reasonable 

assumption because the markets for 

these five lamp types have existed for 

many years, thereby enabling 

manufacturers and retailers to establish 

appropriate inventory levels that reflect 

market demand. Furthermore, in the 

long-run, unit sales could not increase 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS