80214 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 247 / Friday, December 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Laurel May at 

the previously mentioned address in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

After consideration of all relevant 

matter presented, including the 

information and recommendation 

submitted by the Committee and other 

available information, it is hereby found 

that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, 

will tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. 

It is further found that good cause 

exists for not postponing the effective 

date of this rule until 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register (5 

U.S.C. 553) because handlers are already 

shipping potatoes from the 2011–2012 

crop and handlers want to take 

advantage of the revisions as soon as 

possible. Further, handlers are aware of 

this rule, which was recommended at a 

public meeting. Also, a 60-day comment 

period was provided for in the proposed 

rule. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 948 

Marketing agreements, Potatoes, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 948 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 948—IRISH POTATOES GROWN 

IN COLORADO 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 948 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. In § 948.387, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 948.387 Handling regulation. 

* * * * * 

(a) Minimum grade and size 

requirements—All varieties. (1) U.S. No. 

2 or better grade, 17⁄8 inches minimum 

diameter or 4 ounces minimum weight. 

(2) U.S. No. 1 grade, Size B (11⁄2

inches minimum to 21⁄4 inches 

maximum diameter). 

(3) U.S. No. 1 grade, 3⁄4 inch minimum 

to 17⁄8 inches maximum diameter. 

* * * * * 

Dated: December 14, 2011. 

Robert C. Keeney, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–32927 Filed 12–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1150 

[Document No. AMS–DA–11–0007; DA–11– 

02] 

National Dairy Promotion and 

Research Program; Amendments to 

the Order 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the 

Dairy Promotion and Research Order 

(Dairy Order). The amendment modifies 

the number of National Dairy Promotion 

and Research Board (Dairy Board) 

members in eight regions, merges 

Region 8 and Region 10, merges Region 

12 and Region 13, and apportions Idaho 

as a separate region. The total number 

of domestic Dairy Board members 

would remain the same at 36 and the 

total number of regions would be 

reduced from 13 to 12. This amendment 

was requested by the Dairy Board, 

which administers the Dairy Order, to 

better reflect the geographic distribution 

of milk production in the United States. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 23, 

2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Whitney A. Rick, Director, Promotion, 

Research and Planning Division, AMS, 

USDA, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., 

Room 2958–S, Stop 0233, Washington, 

DC 20250–0233. Phone: (202) 720–6909. 

Email: Whitney.Rick@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule is issued pursuant to the Dairy 

Production Stabilization Act (Dairy Act) 

of 1983 [7 U.S.C. 4501–4514], as 

amended. 

Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

has waived the review process required 

by Executive Order 12866 for this 

action. 

Executive Order 12988 

This final rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. This final rule is not 

intended to have a retroactive effect. In 

accordance with section 4512(a) of the 

Dairy Act, this rule will not preempt or 

supersede any other program relating to 

dairy product promotion organized and 

operated under the laws of the United 

States or any State. 

The Dairy Act provides that 

administrative proceedings must be 

exhausted before parties may file suit in 

court. Under section 4509 of the Dairy 

Act, any person subject to the Dairy 

Order may file with the Secretary of 

Agriculture (Secretary) a petition stating 

that the Dairy Order, any provision of 

the Dairy Order, or any obligation 

imposed in connection with the Dairy 

Order is not in accordance with the law 

and request a modification of the Dairy 

Order or to be exempted from the Dairy 

Order. Such person is afforded the 

opportunity for a hearing on the 

petition. After a hearing, the Secretary 

would rule on the petition. The Dairy 

Act provides that the district court of 

the United States in any district in 

which the person is an inhabitant or has 

his principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction to review the Secretary’s 

ruling on the petition, provided a 

complaint is filed not later than 20 days 

after the date of the entry of the ruling. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

In accordance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), the 

Agricultural Marketing Service has 

considered the economic impact of this 

action on small entities and has certified 

that this final rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The purpose of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act is to fit regulatory actions 

to the scale of businesses subject to such 

actions so that small businesses will not 

be disproportionately burdened. 

The Dairy Act authorizes a national 

program for dairy product promotion, 

research and nutrition education. 

Congress found that it is in the public 

interest to authorize the establishment 

of an orderly procedure for financing 

(through assessments on all milk 

produced in the United States for 

commercial use and on imported dairy 

products) and carrying out a 

coordinated program of promotion 

designed to strengthen the dairy 

industry’s position in the marketplace 

and to maintain and expand domestic 

and foreign markets and uses for fluid 

milk and dairy products. 

The Small Business Administration 

[13 CFR 121.201] defines small dairy 

producers as those having annual 

receipts of not more than $750,000 

annually. Most of the producers subject 

to the provisions of the Dairy Order are 

considered small entities. 

The final rule amends the Dairy Order 

by modifying the number of National 

Dairy Promotion and Research Board 

(Dairy Board) members in eight regions, 

merges Region 8 and Region 10, merges 

Region 12 and Region 13, and 

apportions Idaho as a separate region. 

The total number of domestic Dairy 

Board members remains the same at 36 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 247 / Friday, December 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 80215 

and the total number of regions is 

reduced from 13 to 12. This 

modification was requested by the Dairy 

Board, which administers the Dairy 

Order, to better reflect the geographic 

distribution of milk production in the 

United States. 

The Dairy Order is administered by a 

38-member Dairy Board, 36 members 

representing 13 geographic regions 

within the United States and 2 

representing importers. The Dairy Order 

provides in section 1150.131 that the 

Dairy Board shall review the geographic 

distribution of milk production 

throughout the United States and, if 

warranted, shall recommend to the 

Secretary a reapportionment of the 

regions and/or modification of the 

number of members from the regions in 

order to better reflect the geographic 

distribution of milk production volume 

in the United States. The Dairy Board is 

required to conduct the review at least 

every 5 years and not more than every 

3 years. The Dairy Board was last 

modified in 2008 based on 2007 milk 

production. 

Based on a review of the 2010 

geographic distribution of milk 

production, the Dairy Board concluded 

that the number of Dairy Board 

members for eight regions should be 

changed. Additionally, the Dairy Board 

proposed to merge Region 8 and Region 

10, merge Region 12 and Region 13, and 

apportion Idaho as a separate region. 

This amendment will not have a 

significant economic impact on persons 

subject to the Dairy Order. The changes 

merely allow representation of the Dairy 

Board to better reflect geographic milk 

production in the United States. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

In accordance with the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

regulation [5 CFR part 1320] which 

implements the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. chapter 35], the 

information collection requirements and 

record keeping provisions imposed by 

the Dairy Order have been previously 

approved by OMB and assigned OMB 

Control No. 0581–0093. No relevant 

Federal rules have been identified that 

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this 

rule. 

Statement of Consideration 

The Dairy Order currently is 

administered by a 38-member Dairy 

Board, 36 members representing 13 

geographic regions within the United 

States and 2 representing importers. The 

Dairy Order provides in section 

1150.131 that the Dairy Board shall 

review the geographic distribution of 

milk production volume throughout the 

United States and, if warranted, shall 

recommend to the Secretary a 

reapportionment of regions and/or 

modification of the number of producer 

members from regions in order to best 

reflect the geographic distribution of 

milk production in the United States. 

The Dairy Board is required to conduct 

the review at least every 5 years and not 

more than every 3 years. The Dairy 

Board was last modified in 2008 based 

on 2007 milk production. 

Since the Dairy Board’s last 

reapportionment, the Dairy Order was 

amended by a final rule (importer final 

rule) [76 FR 14777, March 18, 2011] to 

implement an assessment on imported 

dairy products to fund promotion and 

research and to add importer 

representation, initially two members, 

to the Dairy Board. Additionally, the 

final rule amended the term ‘‘United 

States’’ in the Dairy Order to mean all 

States, the District of Columbia, and the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 

Assessments on producers in these areas 

were effective April 1, 2011. These 

amendments to the Dairy Order were 

implemented pursuant to the Farm 

Security and Rural Investment Act of 

2008 (2008 Farm Bill) (Pub. L. 110–246). 

In order to complement the current 

geographical makeup of the existing 

regions of the Dairy Board, the importer 

final rule added these four new 

jurisdictions to the region of closest 

proximity. Alaska was added to Region 

1, currently comprised of Oregon and 

Washington; Hawaii was added to 

Region 2, currently California; and the 

District of Columbia and the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico were 

added to Region 10, currently 

comprised of Florida, Georgia, North 

Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia. 

These regional modifications were 

effective March 18, 2011, and were 

reflected in the importer final rule. 

The importer final rule also modified 

the language in section 1150.131 of the 

Dairy Order to remove the specific 

formula for calculating the factor of 

pounds of milk per member, which 

divided total pounds of milk produced 

by 36, as the Dairy Board is now 

comprised of 38 members (36 domestic 

producers and 2 importer 

representatives). While the Dairy Order 

no longer specifies the procedure for 

calculating the factor of pounds of milk 

per member, for the purposes of the 

current reapportionment analysis, the 

procedure remains the same. 

The importer final rule also added 

new language that requires the Secretary 

to review the average volume of imports 

of dairy products into the United States 

and, if warranted, reapportion the 

importer representation on the Dairy 

Board to reflect the proportional shares 

of the United States market served by 

domestic production and imported 

dairy products. This review will take 

place at least once every 3 years, after 

the initial appointment of importer 

representatives on the Dairy Board. 

In 2010, total milk production was 

193,468 million pounds and each of the 

Dairy Board members would represent 

5,374 million pounds of milk. For 2007, 

total milk production was 185,558 

million pounds of milk and each of the 

Dairy Board members represented 5,154 

million pounds of milk. 

Based on the 2010 milk production 

data, the Dairy Board proposed that 

member representation in Region 1 

(Alaska, Oregon, and Washington) be 

increased by one member. Milk 

production in Region 1 increased to 

8,307 million pounds in 2010, up from 

7,764 million pounds in 2007, 

indicating two Dairy Board members 

(8,307 divided by 5,374 = 1.545) 

compared to one Dairy Board member 

based on 2007 milk production data. 

Milk production in Region 2 

(California and Hawaii) decreased from 

40,683 million pounds in 2007 to 40,410 

million pounds in 2010. The Dairy 

Board proposed that seven Dairy Board 

members (40,410 divided by 5,374 = 

7.519) represent Region 2, compared to 

eight Dairy Board members based on 

2007 milk production data. 

Milk production in Region 3 (Arizona, 

Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, 

Utah, and Wyoming) increased from 

21,212 million pounds in 2007 to 22,592 

million pounds in 2010. Specifically, in 

Idaho, milk production increased from 

10,905 million pounds in 2007 to 12,779 

pounds in 2010 and represents more 

than half of the production of Region 3. 

Due to the increase in Idaho production, 

the Dairy Board proposed apportioning 

Idaho as its own region with two Dairy 

Board members. 

Milk production in Region 8 

(Alabama, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, and Tennessee) decreased 

from 3,119 million pounds in 2007 to 

2,624 million pounds in 2010. The 

Dairy Board concluded that Region 8 no 

longer supports one Dairy Board 

member (2,624 divided by 5,374 = 

0.488) and proposed to merge Region 8 

into Region 10 (District of Columbia, 

Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Puerto 

Rico, South Carolina, and Virginia) to 

create a new region with two Dairy 

Board members. 

Similarly, milk production in Region 

13 (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, 

New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and 

Vermont) decreased from 4,046 million 

pounds in 2007 to 4,036 million pounds 

in 2010. The Dairy Board concluded 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
80216 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 247 / Friday, December 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

that Region 13 no longer supports one 

Dairy Board member (4,036 divided by 

5,374 = 0.751) and proposed to merge 

Region 13 into Region 12 (New York), 

creating a new region with three Dairy 

Board members. 

Accordingly, Table 1 summarizes by 

region, the volume of milk production 

distribution for 2010, the percentage of 

total milk production and the adopted 

regions and number of Dairy Board seats 

for each region. 

TABLE 1—REGIONS AND NUMBER OF BOARD SEATS

Regions and states 

Milk 

production 

(mil. lbs.) 

Percentage of 

total milk 

production 

Adopted 

number of 

board seats 

1. Alaska, Oregon, Washington ................................................................................................. 8,307.1 4.3 2 

2. California, Hawaii ................................................................................................................... 40,410.3 21.0 7 

3. Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming ........................................................ 9,813.4 5.0 2 

4. Arkansas, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas ............................................................. 20,321 10.4 4 

5. Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota .............................................................................. 11,370 5.8 2 

6. Wisconsin .............................................................................................................................. 26,035 13.5 5 

7. Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska .......................................................................................... 8,867 4.6 2 

8. Idaho ...................................................................................................................................... 12,779 6.6 2 

9. Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia ................................................................................. 17,188 8.9 3 

10. Alabama, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North 

Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia ................................................ 9,663 5.0 2 

11. Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania ................................................................ 11,965 6.2 2 

12. Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont 16,749.5 8.7 3 

Total .................................................................................................................................... 193,468.3 100 36 

* Milk Production, Disposition, and Income, 2010 Summary, NASS, 2011. 

** Puerto Rico—Various Agricultural Statistics, 2010 Summary, NASS, 2011. 

On August 30, 2011, the Department 

of Agriculture (Department) published 

in the Federal Register (76 FR 53844) a 

proposed rule to amend the Dairy Board 

as indicated above. Interested parties 

were provided an opportunity to file 

comments on the proposed rule on or 

before September 14, 2011. Two 

comments were received by the 

Department. One commenter expressed 

support for the proposed rule and noted 

that the proposal’s criteria and 

methodology used to allocate board 

seats and resulting calculations for 

regional representation was consistent 

with the Dairy Order as recommended 

to the Secretary by the Dairy Board. 

A second commenter suggested that 

milk production should not be the only 

criteria used in establishing regions. As 

noted in the proposed rule, the Dairy 

Act requires that Dairy Board members 

be nominated to represent specific 

geographical regions, and that each 

member represent an equal proportion 

of total U.S. milk production. No other 

criteria exist to be used in establishing 

regions, and therefore no other changes 

are made to the final rule based on this 

comment. Additionally, the commenter 

stated that when making appointments, 

the Secretary should consider 

geographical representation and select 

individuals based on their qualifications 

and experience in working within the 

dairy industry, dairy promotion, and 

commitment to serving the dairy 

farmers who contribute to the 

promotion and research program. AMS 

agrees with this assertion, as it is the 

Department’s policy that board 

membership accurately reflects the 

diversity of the individuals served by 

the program. 

This final rule adopts the proposed 

rule without change, and therefore 

member representation in Region 1 is 

increased from one member to two 

members; Region 2 representation is 

decreased from eight members to seven 

members; Region 3 is decreased from 

four members to two members; Region 

8 and Region 10 are combined to create 

a new Region 10 with two members, and 

is comprised of Alabama, District of 

Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, 

Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, 

Virginia; Region 8 is now comprised of 

the State of Idaho with two members; 

Regions 12 and 13 are combined to 

create a new Region 12 and is 

comprised of Connecticut, Maine, 

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New 

York, Rhode Island, and Vermont with 

three members. 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is found 

and determined that good cause exists 

for not postponing the effective date of 

this rule until 30 days after publication 

in the Federal Register because this rule 

should be in effect as soon as possible 

to appoint Board members for the 2011– 

2014 term. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1150 

Dairy products, Milk, Promotion, 

Research. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 1150 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 1150—DAIRY PROMOTION 

PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1150 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 4501–4514 and 7 

U.S.C. 7401. 

■ 2. Section 1150.131 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b) introductory 

text, (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), (b)(8), (b)(10), 

(b)(12), and removing paragraph (b)(13) 

to read as follows: 

§ 1150.131 Establishment and 

membership. 

* * * * * 

(b) Thirty-six members of the Board 

shall be United States producers. For 

purposes of nominating producers to the 

Board, the United States shall be 

divided into twelve geographic regions 

and the number of Board members from 

each region shall be as follows: 

(1) Two members from region number 

one comprised of the following States: 

Alaska, Oregon and Washington. 

(2) Seven members from region 

number two comprised of the following 

States: California and Hawaii. 

(3) Two members from region number 

three comprised of the following States: 

Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, 

Utah and Wyoming. 

* * * * * 

(8) Two members from region number 

eight comprised of the following State: 

Idaho. 

* * * * * 

(10) Two members from region 

number ten comprised of the following 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 247 / Friday, December 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 80217 

States: Alabama, District of Columbia, 

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, North Carolina, 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, South 

Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. 

* * * * * 

(12) Three members from region 

number twelve comprised of the 

following States: Connecticut, Maine, 

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New 

York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. 

* * * * * 

Dated: December 14, 2011. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2011–32931 Filed 12–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Rural Housing Service 

Rural Business-Cooperative Service 

Rural Utilities Service 

Farm Service Agency 

7 CFR Part 1940 

Rural Business-Cooperative Service 

Rural Utilities Service 

7 CFR Part 4290 

RIN 0570–AA80 

Rural Business Investment Program 

AGENCY: Rural Business-Cooperative 

Service; Rural Utilities Service; Rural 

Housing Service; and Farm Service 

Agency, USDA. 

ACTION: Interim rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Rural BusinessCooperative Service is amending its 

regulations for the Rural Business 

Investment Program (RBIP) to conform it 

to the 2008 Farm Bill, to add provisions 

for Rural Business Investment 

Companies (RBIC) that wish to 

participate in a non-leveraged capacity, 

and to make several clarifications to the 

existing rule for leveraged RBICs. In 

addition, this rule amends the 

categorical exclusions from the National 

Environmental Policy Act by adding 

categorical exclusions for the RBIP for 

both leveraged and non-leveraged 

RBICs. 

DATES: Effective date. This rule will 

become effective January 23, 2012. 

Comment date. Written comments on 

the rule must be received by the Agency 

or carry a postmark or equivalent no 

later than January 23, 2012. The 

comment period for the information 

collection under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 ends January 23, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

to this rule by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Submit written comments via 

the U.S. Postal Service to the Branch 

Chief, Regulations and Paperwork 

Management Branch, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, STOP 0742, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20250–0742. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Submit 

written comments via Federal Express 

Mail or other courier service requiring a 

street address to the Branch Chief, 

Regulations and Paperwork 

Management Branch, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, 300 7th Street SW., 7th 

Floor, Washington, DC 20024. 

All written comments will be 

available for public inspection during 

regular work hours at the 300 7th Street 

SW., 7th Floor address listed above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Regulation. Michael Foore, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, 1400 

Independence Ave. SW., Washington, 

DC, 20250; telephone number: (202) 

690–4730; email: michael.foore@wdc.

usda.gov. 

Applications and other program 

materials. Mark Brodziski, Specialty 

Programs Division, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave. 

SW., Washington, DC 20250; telephone 

number: (202) 720–1400; email: mark.

brodziski@wdc.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Compliance With Executive Order 

12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that this rule 

does not constitute a ‘‘significant’’ 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. Therefore, a regulatory 

assessment is not required. 

Programs Affected 

The Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance number for the program 

impacted by this action is 10.860, Rural 

Business Investment Program. 

Executive Order 12372 

Executive Order 12372 requires 

intergovernmental consultation with 

State and local officials. For the Rural 

Business Investment Program, the 

Agency will conduct intergovernmental 

consultation in the manner delineated 

in 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V, which 

contains the Agency’s regulations for 

implementing Executive Order 12372. 

Executive Order 12988 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. The Agency has determined 

that this rule meets the applicable 

standards provided in section 3 of the 

Executive Order. Additionally, (1) all 

state and local laws and regulations that 

are in conflict with this rule will be 

preempted; (2) no retroactive effect will 

be given to the rule; and (3) 

administrative appeal procedures, if 

any, must be exhausted before litigation 

against the Department or its agencies 

may be initiated, in accordance with the 

regulations of the National Appeals 

Division of USDA at 7 CFR part 11. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The policies contained in this rule do 

not have any substantial direct effect on 

states, on the relationship between the 

national government and the states, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Nor does this 

interim rule impose substantial direct 

compliance costs on state and local 

governments. Therefore, consultation 

with states is not required. 

Executive Order 13175 

Between October 2010 and January 

2011 the United States Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) hosted seven 

regional regulation Tribal consultation 

sessions to gain input by elected Tribal 

officials or their designees concerning 

the impact of this rule on Tribal 

governments, communities, and 

individuals. These sessions established 

a baseline of consultation for future 

actions, should any be necessary, 

regarding this rule. Reports from these 

sessions for consultation will be made 

part of the USDA annual reporting on 

Tribal Consultation and Collaboration. 

USDA will respond in a timely and 

meaningful manner to all Tribal 

government requests for consultation 

concerning this rule and will provide 

additional venues, such as webinars and 

teleconferences, to periodically host 

collaborative conversations with Tribal 

leaders and their representatives 

concerning ways to improve this rule in 

Indian country as needed. The policies 

contained in this rule do not have 

implications that preempt Tribal law. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 

Under section 605(b) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 

605(b), the Agency certifies that this 

rule will not have a significant 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES