70874 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

Public Participation 

This action is being finalized without 

prior notice or public comment under 

authority of 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A) and 

(B) to quickly implement the waiver 

extension granted by the Child Nutrition 

and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004. 

Thus, the Department of Agriculture has 

determined in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

553(b) that Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking and Opportunity for Public 

Comments is unnecessary and contrary 

to the public interest and, in accordance 

with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), finds that good 

cause exists for making this action 

effective without prior public 

participation. 

Civil Rights Impact Analysis 

FNS has reviewed this final rule in 

accordance with the Department 

Regulation 4300–4, ‘‘Civil Rights Impact 

Analysis,’’ to identify any major civil 

rights impacts the rule might have on 

children on the basis of race, color, 

national origin, sex, religion, or 

disability. After a careful review of the 

rule’s intent and provisions, FNS has 

determined that it does not affect the 

participation of protected individuals in 

the National School Lunch Program.

List of Subjects 

7 CFR Part 210

Food and Nutrition Service, Grant 

programs–education, Grant programs–

health, Infants and children, Nutrition, 

Penalties, Reporting and record keeping 

requirements, School breakfast and 

lunch programs, Surplus agricultural 

commodities. 

7 CFR Part 220

Food and Nutrition Service, Grant 

programs–education, Grant programs–

health, Infants and children, Nutrition, 

Reporting and record keeping 

requirements, School breakfast and 

lunch programs.

■ Accordingly, 7 CFR Parts 210 and 220 

are amended as follows:

PART 210—NATIONAL SCHOOL 

LUNCH PROGRAM

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 

210 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1751–1760, 1779.

§ 210.10 [Amended]

■ 2. In § 210.10:

■ a. The last sentence of paragraph 

(i)(5)(i) is amended by removing the year 

‘‘2003’’ and adding in its place the year 

‘‘2009’’.

■ b. The last sentence of paragraph 

(l)(4)(viii) is amended by removing the 

year ‘‘2003’’ and adding in its place the 

year ‘‘2009’’.

PART 220—SCHOOL BREAKFAST 

PROGRAM

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 

220 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1773, 1779, unless 

otherwise noted.

§ 220.8 [Amended]

■ 2. In § 220.8:

■ a. The last sentence of paragraph 

(e)(5)(i) is amended by removing the year 

‘‘2003’’ and adding in its place the year 

‘‘2009’’.

■ b. The last sentence of paragraph 

(h)(3)(viii) is amended by removing the 

year ‘‘2003’’ and adding in its place the 

year ‘‘2009’’.

Dated: November 24, 2004. 

Roberto Salazar, 

Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.

[FR Doc. 04–26933 Filed 12–7–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–30–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 905

[Docket No. FV04–905–5 FIR] 

Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and 

Tangelos Grown in Florida; 

Modification of the Procedures Used 

To Limit the Volume of Small Red 

Seedless Grapefruit Grown in Florida

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) is adopting, as a 

final rule, without change, an interim 

final rule that changed the procedures 

used to limit the volume of sizes 48 and 

56 red seedless grapefruit entering the 

fresh market under the marketing order 

for oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and 

tangelos grown in Florida (order). The 

order is administered locally by the 

Citrus Administrative Committee 

(Committee). This rule continues in 

effect changes in the way a handler’s 

average week is calculated when 

quantities of small red seedless 

grapefruit are regulated and changes the 

provisions governing overshipments. 

This action makes the regulation more 

responsive to industry needs and better 

allocates base quantities.

DATES: Effective January 7, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Doris Jamieson, Southeast Marketing 

Field Office, Marketing Order 

Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 799 

Overlook Drive, Suite A, Winter Haven, 

Florida 33884; telephone: (863) 324–

3375, Fax: (863) 325–8793; or George 

Kelhart, Technical Advisor, Marketing 

Order Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 

0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237; 

telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202) 

720–8938. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Jay Guerber, 

Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; telephone: (202) 720–

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or e-mail: 

Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Agreement 

No. 84 and Marketing Order No. 905, 

both as amended (7 CFR part 905), 

regulating the handling of oranges, 

grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos 

grown in Florida, hereinafter referred to 

as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is effective 

under the Agricultural Marketing 

Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 

U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter referred to 

as the ‘‘Act.’’

USDA is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This rule is not intended to 

have retroactive effect. This rule will 

not preempt any State or local laws, 

regulations, or policies, unless they 

present an irreconcilable conflict with 

this rule. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any 

handler subject to an order may file 

with USDA a petition stating that the 

order, any provision of the order, or any 

obligation imposed in connection with 

the order is not in accordance with law 

and request a modification of the order 

or to be exempted therefrom. A handler 

is afforded the opportunity for a hearing 

on the petition. After the hearing USDA 

would rule on the petition. The Act 

provides that the district court of the 

United States in any district in which 

the handler is an inhabitant, or has his 

or her principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on 

the petition, provided an action is filed 

not later than 20 days after the date of 

the entry of the ruling. 

This rule continues in effect changes 

in the procedures used to limit the 

volume of sizes 48 and 56 red seedless 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 70875

grapefruit entering the fresh market. 

This rule changes the way a handler’s 

average week is calculated when 

quantities of small red seedless 

grapefruit are regulated by adjusting the 

prior period used from five preceding 

seasons to three preceding seasons. This 

action also changes the provisions 

governing overshipments. This rule 

makes the regulation more responsive to 

industry needs and better allocates base 

quantities. The Committee unanimously 

recommended these changes at a 

meeting held on June 15, 2004. 

Section 905.52 of the order provides 

authority to limit shipments of any 

grade or size, or both, of any variety of 

Florida citrus. Such limitations may 

restrict the shipment of a portion of a 

specified grade or size of a variety. 

Under such a limitation, the quantity of 

such grade or size a handler may ship 

during a particular week would be 

established as a percentage of the total 

shipments of such variety by such 

handler in a prior period, established by 

the Committee and approved by USDA. 

Section 905.153 of the regulations 

specifies procedures for limiting the 

volume of small red seedless grapefruit 

entering the fresh market. With this 

change, this section defines the prior 

period required by § 905.52 as an 

average week within the immediately 

preceding three seasons. An average 

week is calculated for each handler. 

This section specifies that the 

Committee may recommend only a 

certain percentage of sizes 48 and 56 red 

seedless grapefruit be made available for 

fresh shipment for any week or weeks 

during the regulatory period. Under 

such a limitation, the quantity of sizes 

48 and 56 red seedless grapefruit that a 

handler may ship is calculated by taking 

the recommended percentage times the 

handler’s average week. Section 905.153 

also details overshipment provisions 

specifying that any handler may ship an 

amount of sizes 48 and 56 red seedless 

grapefruit up to 10 percent greater than 

their allotted volume each week. The 

quantity of such overshipment is 

deducted from the handler’s allotment 

for the following week. Overshipments 

are not permitted during the final 

regulatory week. 

This rule amends § 905.153 by 

revising the definition of prior period 

and the language governing 

overshipments. This rule continues in 

effect changes in the number of 

preceding seasons used to calculate a 

handler’s average week from five 

preceding seasons to three preceding 

seasons. This rule also continues in 

effect changes in the provisions 

regarding overshipments redefining 

when overshipments are permitted.

Section 905.52 specifies that 

whenever any size limitation restricts 

the shipment of a portion of a specified 

size, the quantity each handler may ship 

during a particular week shall be based 

on a prior period recommended by the 

Committee and approved by USDA. 

When the Committee initially 

recommended the procedures in 

§ 905.153 to limit the volume of small 

red seedless grapefruit entering the fresh 

market during the regulated period (61 

FR 69011, December 31, 1996), they 

determined an average week within the 

preceding five seasons would be the 

prior period used to calculate a 

handler’s base quantity for each week of 

regulation. 

Prior to this change, an average week 

was calculated by adding the total red 

seedless grapefruit shipments by a 

handler during the 33-week period 

beginning the third Monday in 

September for the preceding five 

seasons. This total was divided by five 

to establish an average season. The 

average season was then divided by the 

33 weeks in a season to derive the 

average week. When the Committee 

utilizes these provisions and establishes 

percentages for the regulatory period, a 

handler’s average week is multiplied by 

the applicable percentage to establish 

that handler’s base quantity for shipping 

small red seedless grapefruit during that 

particular week. 

The Committee initially chose to use 

the past five seasons to calculate an 

average season, because it thought that 

the five-year period helped adjust for 

variations in growing conditions 

between the seasons. At the time, the 

Committee believed using five seasons 

provided the most accurate picture of an 

average season and by using the average 

season to calculate an average week, 

provided each handler with an equitable 

base from which to establish shipments. 

However, since these procedures were 

established, there have been many 

changes in the industry. Some handlers 

have increased their volume of red 

seedless grapefruit shipments, while 

others have decreased their shipments 

or stopped shipping grapefruit 

altogether. 

Because of the continuing changes in 

the industry, the Committee believes 

that using the past five seasons no 

longer provides the most accurate 

picture of an average season. At its June 

15, 2004, meeting, the Committee 

discussed the prior period, and 

unanimously recommended changing 

from a five-season average to a threeseason average when calculating a 

handler’s average week. The Committee 

believes that this adjustment in the prior 

period better reflects changes in the 

industry, and better allocates the base 

quantities for all handlers of red 

seedless grapefruit. 

The Committee further believes that 

the use of a three-season average is more 

responsive in reallocating base than a 

five-season average. Under a five-season 

average, it can be several seasons before 

changes in shipping volume are 

reflected in the allotment a handler 

receives. With a five-season average, 

handlers that have decided to limit their 

grapefruit business receive more 

allotment than they need for several 

seasons even though this allotment 

could be better utilized by handlers that 

are increasing their market for red 

seedless grapefruit. The Committee 

believes that this change better allocates 

allotment by increasing the base for 

handlers that have increased their red 

grapefruit shipments and by reducing 

the base for handlers that have reduced 

their red grapefruit shipments. 

Consequently, the Committee also 

believes that this change reduces the 

need for loans and transfers by shifting 

additional base to those with increasing 

shipments. Handlers who are increasing 

their volume of red seedless grapefruit 

shipments often need additional 

allotment to meet their market demands 

and rely on the provisions in § 905.153 

that provide for allotment loans and 

transfers. Under these provisions, a 

handler may borrow allotment from 

another handler or allotments can be 

transferred from one handler to another. 

These procedures provide a means for 

handlers who have increased their 

volume of red seedless grapefruit 

shipments to meet the demands of the 

market and their buyers. 

However, handlers do not know how 

much allotment other handlers have or 

if the allotment will be used. The 

Committee believes that this change 

from a five to a three-year average in 

computing base quantities better reflects 

the needs of the industry and lessens 

the need for loans and transfers. This 

benefits handlers and the Committee 

staff who process loans and transfers. 

Therefore, the Committee recommended 

changing the prior period used to 

calculate an average week from five 

seasons to three seasons. 

The Committee also discussed 

revising the provisions in § 905.153(d) 

relating to overshipments and the loan 

or transfer of allotment during week 22. 

As stated previously, any handler may 

ship an amount of sizes 48 and 56 red 

seedless grapefruit up to 10 percent 

greater than their allotment during any 

regulated week. The quantity of such 

overshipment is deducted from the 

handler’s allotment for the following 

week. Prior to this change, the rules and 

70876 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

regulations specified that overshipments 

were not allowed during week 22, 

because week 22 is the last week of the 

regulation period and does not provide 

an opportunity for repayment of any 

overshipments. 

The Committee is continuously 

meeting during the regulated period to 

discuss the market for red seedless 

grapefruit and possible changes to the 

weekly percentages. It believes that 

market conditions could cause it to 

recommend the removal of regulation 

prior to the end of week 22. To 

recognize this possibility, the 

Committee recommended changing 

these provisions to specify that 

overshipments are not permitted during 

the last week of regulation rather than 

week 22. 

Section 8e of the Act requires that 

whenever grade, size, quality or 

maturity requirements are in effect for 

certain commodities under a domestic 

marketing order, including grapefruit, 

imports of that commodity must meet 

the same or comparable requirements. 

This rule does not change the minimum 

grade and size requirements under the 

order. Therefore, no change is necessary 

in the grapefruit import regulations as a 

result of this action. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the 

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) 

has considered the economic impact of 

this action on small entities. 

Accordingly, AMS has prepared this 

final regulatory flexibility analysis. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

business subject to such actions in order 

that small businesses will not be unduly 

or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. Thus, both statutes have small 

entity orientation and compatibility. 

There are approximately 75 handlers 

of Florida grapefruit who are subject to 

regulation under the marketing order 

and approximately 11,000 growers of 

citrus in the regulated area. Small 

agricultural service firms, including 

handlers, are defined by the Small 

Business Administration (SBA) as those 

having annual receipts of less than 

$5,000,000, and small agricultural 

producers are defined as those having 

annual receipts of less than $750,000 

(13 CFR 121.201). 

Based on industry and Committee 

data, the average annual f.o.b. price for 

fresh Florida red seedless grapefruit 

during the 2003–04 season was 

approximately $7.58 per 4⁄5-bushel 

carton, and total fresh shipments for the 

2003–04 season are estimated at 24.7 

million cartons of red grapefruit. 

Approximately 25 percent of all 

handlers handled 75 percent of Florida’s 

grapefruit shipments. Using the average 

f.o.b. price, at least 80 percent of the 

grapefruit handlers could be considered 

small businesses under the SBA 

definition. Therefore, the majority of 

Florida grapefruit handlers may be 

classified as small entities. The majority 

of Florida grapefruit producers may also 

be classified as small entities. 

This rule continues in effect revisions 

to the procedures used to limit the 

volume of sizes 48 and 56 red seedless 

grapefruit entering the fresh market 

under the order. This rule changes the 

way a handler’s average week is 

calculated for purposes of this 

limitation by adjusting the prior period 

used from the five preceding seasons to 

the three preceding seasons. This action 

also amends the language governing 

overshipments for the last week of 

regulation. This rule revises the 

provisions of § 905.153. Authority for 

this action is provided in § 905.52 of the 

order. The Committee unanimously 

recommended this action at a meeting 

on June 15, 2004. 

This rule revises procedures in 

§ 905.153 used in implementing 

percentage size regulations for small red 

seedless grapefruit under the order. 

These procedures will be applied 

uniformly for all handlers regardless of 

size. This action is not expected to 

decrease the overall consumption of red 

seedless grapefruit.

While during the period of regulation 

this change may result in some handlers 

receiving a smaller allotment of smallsized red grapefruit, it provides 

additional allotment to those handlers 

that have increased shipments. This rule 

changes how each handler’s share of the 

weekly allotment is calculated, but has 

a limited affect on the total allotment 

made available by the weekly 

percentages. This change in itself does 

not reduce the total weekly industry 

base available. It only reallocates the 

distribution of the base. Statistics for 

2003–04 show that the total available 

industry allotment was used in only 3 

weeks of the 22 week regulated period. 

This change should result in a better 

utilization of the overall industry base 

allotments. Because the base allotments 

will be readily available to those 

handlers needing it, handlers will be 

better able to meet buyer needs and 

additional shipments might result. 

In addition, if handlers require 

additional allotment, they can still 

transfer, borrow, or loan allotment based 

on their needs in a given week. 

Approximately 315 loans and transfers 

were utilized last season. This rule will 

help reduce the need for loans and 

transfers by better allocating the 

available base. This will help reduce the 

amount of time and effort needed to 

reallocate allotment through loans and 

transfers. This may result in a cost 

savings by reducing administrative costs 

for the Committee. 

This rule provides handlers with 

allotment more reflective of their 

current operations. In addition, this rule 

changes the provisions on 

overshipments to provide for the 

possibility that the Committee might 

choose to end regulation prior to week 

22. This rule makes the regulation more 

responsive to industry needs and better 

allocates base quantities. 

The Committee discussed maintaining 

the number of seasons used to calculate 

the prior period at five. However, the 

Committee believes that a three-season 

period will result in a better utilization 

of the overall industry base allotment. 

Therefore, this alternative was rejected. 

This rule will not impose any 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

grapefruit handlers. As with all Federal 

marketing order programs, reports and 

forms are periodically reviewed to 

reduce information requirements and 

duplication by industry and public 

sector agencies. 

In addition, as noted in the initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis, USDA 

has not identified any relevant Federal 

rules that duplicate, overlap or conflict 

with this rule. However, red seedless 

grapefruit must meet the requirements 

as specified in the U.S. Standards for 

Grades of Florida Grapefruit (7 CFR 

51.760 through 51.784) issued under the 

Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 

U.S.C. 1621 through 1627). 

Further, the Committee’s meeting was 

widely publicized throughout the citrus 

industry and all interested persons were 

invited to attend the meeting and 

participate in Committee deliberations 

on all issues. Like all Committee 

meetings, the June 15, 2004, meeting 

was a public meeting and all entities, 

both large and small, were able to 

express views on this issue. 

An interim final rule concerning this 

action was published in the Federal 

Register on August 16, 2004. Copies of 

the rule were mailed or sent via 

facsimile to all Committee members and 

grapefruit growers and handlers. In 

addition, the rule was made available 

through the internet by USDA and the 

Office of the Federal Register. That rule 

provided for a 30-day comment period, 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 70877

which ended September 15, 2004. No 

comments were received. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/

fv/moab.html. Any questions about the 

compliance guide should be sent to Jay 

Guerber at the previously mentioned 

address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

After consideration of all relevant 

material presented, including the 

Committee’s recommendation, and 

other information, it is found that 

finalizing the interim final rule, without 

change, as published in the Federal 

Register, (69 FR 50275, August 16, 

2004) will tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 905

Grapefruit, Marketing agreements, 

Oranges, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Tangelos, Tangerines.

PART 905—ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT, 

TANGERINES, AND TANGELOS 

GROWN IN FLORIDA

■ Accordingly, the interim final rule 

amending 7 CFR part 905 which was 

published at 69 FR 50275 on August 16, 

2004, is adopted as a final rule without 

change.

Dated: December 2, 2004. 

A.J. Yates, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service.

[FR Doc. 04–26861 Filed 12–7–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Rural Utilities Service 

7 CFR Part 1775

RIN 0572–AB75

Technical Assistance Grants

AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service 

(RUS), an agency delivering the United 

States Department of Agriculture’s Rural 

Development Utilities Programs, 

amends the regulation utilized to 

administer the technical assistance grant 

programs. This action is necessary to 

separate the technical assistance and 

training grant and solid waste 

management grant programs for 

clarification purposes, and to bring the 

regulation in line with revisions to OMB 

circulars. Additionally, it eliminates the 

requirement that applicants submit a 

pre-application when applying for grant 

funds. This action also transfers grant 

processing and servicing from the 

National Office to Rural Development 

State Offices. The intended effect is to 

separate the technical assistance and 

solid waste management programs and 

to reduce regulatory burdens on 

applicants.

DATES: This rule is effective January 7, 

2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephen Saulnier, Loan Specialist, 

Water Programs Division, Rural Utilities 

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 

2235–S, Stop 1570, Washington, DC 

20250–1570. Telephone (202) 690–2526. 

E–Mail: ssaulnie@rus.usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Order 12866

This rule has been determined to be 

not significant for the purposes of 

Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, 

has not been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). 

Executive Order 12372

This rule is excluded from the scope 

of Executive Order 12372, 

Intergovernmental Consultation, which 

may require consultation with State and 

local officials. See the final rule related 

notice titled, ‘‘Technical Assistance and 

Training Grants Program; Proposal to 

Exclude Program and Activity From 

Executive Order 12372,’’ (53 FR 44505) 

which determined that the RUS grants 

were not covered by Executive Order 

12372. 

Executive Order 12988

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. RUS has determined that this 

proposed rule meets the applicable 

standards provided in section 3 of the 

Executive Order. In addition, all State 

and local laws and regulations that are 

in conflict with this rule will be 

preempted; no retroactive effect will be 

given to the rule; and, in accordance 

with Section 212(e) of the Department of 

Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 

(7 U.S.C section 6912(e)), administrative 

appeal procedures, if any are required, 

must be exhausted prior to initiating 

any action against the Department or its 

agencies. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 

Under section 605(b) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 

605(b)), RUS certifies that this rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. The amendments reflect only 

statutory changes that Congress has 

mandated and over which RUS has no 

discretion. 

Information Collection and 

Recordkeeping Requirements 

The information collection and 

recordkeeping requirements contained 

in this rule have been cleared under 

OMB control number 0572–0112 in 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35). 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Certification 

The Administrator of RUS has 

determined that this rule will not 

significantly affect the quality of the 

human environment as defined by the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Therefore, 

this action does not require an 

environmental impact statement or 

assessment. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

The programs described by this rule 

are listed in the Catalog of Federal 

Domestic Assistance Programs under 

numbers 10.761, Technical Assistance 

and Training Grants and 10.762, Solid 

Waste Management Grants. This catalog 

is available on a subscription basis from 

the Superintendent of Documents, the 

United States Government Printing 

Office, Washington, DC, 20402–9325, 

telephone number (202) 512–1800. 

Unfunded Mandates 

This rule contains no Federal 

mandates (under the regulatory 

provision of Title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995) for State, 

local, and tribal governments or the 

private sector. Thus this rule is not 

subject to the requirements of section 

202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995. 

Background 

On November 2, 1987, the Farmers 

Home Administration (FmHA) 

(predecessor of RUS) published 7 CFR 

part 1942, subpart J, Technical 

Assistance and Training Grants, as a 

final rule in the Federal Register (52 FR 

41950) implementing a new grant 

program. On February 5, 1992, FmHA 

published 7 CFR part 1942, subpart J, 

Technical Assistance and Training 

Grants, as a final rule in the Federal 

Register (57 FR 4357) revising the 

regulation to implement another new 

grant program. In 1994, when RUS 

assumed the functions of the Water and 

Waste Disposal programs from the 

former FmHA and the Rural 

Development Administration (RDA), 

RUS changed the Technical Assistance