This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

51094 

Vol. 74, No. 191 

Monday, October 5, 2009 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1205 

[Doc. # AMS–CN–09–0032; CN–08–003] 

Cotton Research and Promotion 

Program: Designation of CottonProducing States; Secretary’s Decision 

and Referendum Order on Proposed 

Amendments to the Cotton Research 

and Promotion Order 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule and referendum 

order. 

SUMMARY: This is the Secretary’s 

decision concerning amendments to the 

Cotton Research and Promotion Order 

(Cotton Order) and provides Upland 

cotton producers and importers with the 

opportunity to vote in a referendum to 

determine if they favor the changes. The 

amendments would implement section 

14202 of the Food, Conservation, and 

Energy Act of 2008 (2008 Farm Bill) that 

amended the Cotton Research and 

Promotion Act (Cotton Act.) The 2008 

Farm Bill provided that Kansas, 

Virginia, and Florida be separate states 

in the definition of ‘‘cotton-producing 

state’’ effective beginning with the 2008 

crop of cotton. It has been determined 

that amendments need to be expedited 

and therefore a recommended decision 

is omitted. 

DATES: For the purpose of determining 

producer voter eligibility, the 

representative production period is the 

period January 1, 2008, through 

December 31, 2008. For the purpose of 

determining importer voter eligibility, 

the 12-month period during which 

qualifying imports of cotton must have 

been made is January 1, 2008, through 

December 31, 2008. 

The referendum will be held during 

the period October 13, 2009, through 

November 10, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shethir M. Riva, Chief, Research and 

Promotion Staff, Cotton and Tobacco 

Programs, AMS, USDA, Stop 0224, 1400 

Independence Ave., SW., Room 2637–S, 

Washington, DC 20250–0224, telephone 

(202) 720–6603, facsimile (202) 690– 

1718, or email at 

Shethir.Riva@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prior 

documents in this proceeding: Notice of 

Hearing issued on November 24, 2008, 

and published in the December 1, 2008, 

issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 

72747). 

This administrative action is governed 

by the provisions of sections 556 and 

557 of title 5 of the United States Code 

and, therefore, is excluded from the 

requirements of Executive Order 12866. 

Preliminary Statement 

The proposed amendments were 

formulated based on the record of the 

public hearing held in Washington, DC, 

on December 5, 2008. The hearing was 

held to consider and receive evidence 

from Upland cotton producers, 

importers, and other interested parties 

on the proposed amendments to the 

Cotton Order (7 CFR part 1205). The 

hearing was held pursuant to the 

provisions of the Cotton Act (7 U.S.C. 

2101–2118), and the applicable rules of 

practice and procedure governing 

research and promotion programs (7 

CFR part 1200). The proposed 

amendments in this decision would: (1) 

Amend the Cotton Order to incorporate 

the States of Kansas, Virginia, and 

Florida into the definition of ‘‘cottonproducing state’’ as separate states, (2) 

amend the definition of ‘‘cottonproducing region’’ to list Kansas, 

Virginia, and Florida as separate states, 

and (3) make any such changes as may 

be necessary to the Cotton Order if any 

of the proposed amendments as 

adopted, so that all of the Cotton Order’s 

provisions conform to the effectuated 

amendments. AMS believes that 

conditions exist that warrant the 

omission of a recommended decision in 

this rulemaking proceeding under 7 CFR 

1200.13(d) of the Rules of Practice and 

Procedure with respect to the proposed 

amendments. 

The amendments are proposed by 

AMS to amend the Cotton Order and to 

implement section 14202 of the 2008 

Farm Bill that amended the Cotton Act. 

In addition, AMS proposed to amend 

the definition of cotton-producing 

region for consistency with the changes 

to the definition of cotton-producing 

state. AMS also proposed to make such 

changes as may be necessary to the 

Cotton Order to conform to any 

amendment that may result from the 

hearing. No conforming changes were 

determined to be necessary by AMS. 

Three witnesses testified at the 

hearing, and all were in favor of the 

amendments. One witness represented 

AMS, one witness represented the 

Virginia Cotton Growers Association 

and the National Council, and lastly, 

one witness represented the Cotton 

Board. 

At the conclusion of the hearing, the 

Administrative Law Judge set January 

14, 2009, as the date for interested 

persons to file proposed findings and 

conclusions or written arguments and 

briefs based on the evidence received at 

the hearing on the proposed 

amendments. The Hearing Clerk 

received six briefs during the briefing 

period. Briefs were received from the 

offices of Congressman Allen Boyd, Jr., 

Florida; Congressman Bob Goodlatte, 

Virginia; and, Senator Pat Roberts, 

Kansas. Comments also were received 

from the Kansas Cotton Association, the 

Florida Farm Bureau; and, Southern 

Cotton Growers, Inc. Each of these briefs 

expressed full support of the prompt 

implementation of the amendments 

proposed by AMS. All discussions in 

briefs pertaining to the amendments 

proposed in this decision were 

considered. Two briefs, one from the 

office of Senator Bill Nelson, Florida; 

and one from the United States 

Association of Importers of Textiles and 

Apparel, were received after the January 

14, date and therefore were untimely. 

Accordingly, they were not considered 

in this decision. 

Proposals in This Decision 

AMS proposed these amendments to 

the Cotton Order for the purpose of 

implementing changes to the Cotton Act 

as mandated by section 14202 of the 

2008 Farm Bill. Section 14202 modified 

the Cotton Act by adding States of 

Kansas, Virginia, and Florida to the 

definition of ‘‘cotton-producing state’’ as 

separate states effective beginning with 

the 2008 crop of cotton. A crop year is 

synonymous with marketing year and 7 

CFR 1205.320 of the Cotton Order 

defines ‘‘marketing year’’ as a 

consecutive 12-month period ending 

July 31. 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 191 / Monday, October 5, 2009 / Proposed Rules 51095 

AMS proposed to amend section 

1205.314 of the Cotton Order to 

incorporate the States of Kansas, 

Virginia, and Florida into the definition 

of cotton-producing state and amend 

section 1205.319 to reflect the 

incorporation of the above three states 

in the definition of cotton-producing 

region. 

Material Issues 

The material issues in this decision 

presented on the record of the hearing 

are as follows: 

1. Whether to amend section 1205.314 

to read as follows: Cotton-producing 

State means each of the following States 

and combination of States: Alabama; 

Arizona; Arkansas; California-Nevada; 

Florida; Georgia; Kansas; Louisiana; 

Mississippi; Missouri-Illinois; New 

Mexico; North Carolina; Oklahoma; 

South Carolina; Tennessee-Kentucky; 

Texas; and Virginia. 

2. Whether to amend section 1205.319 

to read as follows: ‘‘Cotton-producing 

region’’ means each of the following 

groups of cotton-producing States: (a) 

Southeast Region: Alabama, Florida, 

Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, 

and Virginia; (b) Midsouth Region: 

Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, 

Missouri-Illinois, and TennesseeKentucky; (c) Southwest Region: 

Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas; (d) 

Western Region: Arizona, CaliforniaNevada, and New Mexico. 

3. Whether to expedite the decision 

on all of the proposals by omitting the 

recommended decision and proceeding 

directly to the Secretary’s decision and 

referendum order. 

Findings and Conclusions 

The following findings and 

conclusions on the material issues are 

based on the record of the hearing. 

Material Issue Number 1 

Section 1205.314 should be amended 

to provide that the States of Kansas, 

Virginia, and Florida be separate states 

in the definition of ‘‘Cotton-Producing 

State.’’ Section 1205.314 should read as 

follows: ‘‘Cotton-producing State’’ 

means each of the following States and 

combination of States: Alabama; 

Arizona; Arkansas; California-Nevada; 

Florida; Georgia; Kansas; Louisiana; 

Mississippi; Missouri-Illinois; New 

Mexico; North Carolina; Oklahoma; 

South Carolina; Tennessee-Kentucky; 

Texas; and Virginia. 

Section 1205.314 of the Cotton Order 

currently defines Cotton-Producing 

State as, ‘‘Cotton-producing State means 

each of the following States and 

combination of States: Alabama-Florida; 

Arizona; Arkansas; California-Nevada; 

Georgia; Louisiana; Mississippi; 

Missouri-Illinois; New Mexico; North 

Carolina-Virginia; Oklahoma; South 

Carolina; Tennessee-Kentucky; Texas.’’ 

Currently, Kansas is not included in this 

definition, Virginia is combined as a 

region with North Carolina, and Florida 

is combined as a region with Alabama. 

AMS is proposing to amend the 

definition so that Kansas is added and 

Florida and Virginia are separated from 

their current partner states. 

The witness representing AMS 

testified that the major effect of these 

changes is that any cotton producer 

organization, in any cotton-producing 

state, including the respective States of 

Kansas, Virginia, and Florida, may 

request certification from the Secretary 

pursuant to section 1205.341 of the 

Order to participate in nominating 

members and alternate members to 

represent such State on the Cotton 

Board pursuant to section 1205.324. The 

witness also testified that the change 

would also allow the States of Kansas, 

Virginia, and Florida, pursuant to 

section 1205.322(b)(1), to have at least 

one member, and one additional 

member for each 1 million bales or 

major fraction (more than half) thereof 

of cotton produced in the state and 

marketed above 1 million bales during 

the period specified in the regulations 

for determining board membership. 

Further, the AMS witness stated that in 

determining whether any cottonproducing state is entitled to be 

represented by more than one member 

of the Cotton Board, as provided in 

section 1205.322, average annual 

production of Upland cotton in terms of 

480-pound net weight bales for the five 

most recent marketing years will be 

used as the criteria for determination of 

such additional members. 

The AMS witness cited the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture’s National 

Agricultural Statistics Service’s report 

entitled Cotton Ginnings 2007 Summary 

(Exhibit 6), which published the total 

bales produced and ginned (or 

marketed) by State. In the 2007 

marketing year, according to this 

publication, Florida produced 105,900 

Upland cotton 480-pound bales and 

would be entitled to one member and 

one alternate. Kansas produced 53,500 

Upland cotton 480-pound bales and 

would be entitled to one member and 

one alternate. Virginia produced 98,050 

480-pound bales and would be entitled 

to one member and one alternate. 

We also note that the Cotton Ginnings 

2007 Summary shows the bales ginned 

for: Alabama—409,900 bales and North 

Carolina—61,600 bales. This 

demonstrates that those states have 

significant production of cotton, and 

having their own Cotton Board seats 

would not be inappropriate. 

The AMS witness stated that if the 

proposed changes are adopted, a total of 

three additional members and three 

alternates would be added to the Cotton 

Board. The witness said the 2008 Cotton 

Board was composed of 37 members 

and 37 alternate members, which are 22 

producer and 15 importer members and 

their respective alternates, and one 

consumer advisor. Excluding the 

proposed amendment to the Cotton 

Order, the 2009 Cotton Board, already 

calculated, would be 38 members and 

38 alternates, which would be 23 

producers and 15 importer members 

and respective alternates. The AMS 

witness indicated that if current cotton 

production and cotton imports remain 

consistent with their 5-year averages, 

and there are no changes, then just three 

additional producer members will be 

added based on the cotton gin for those 

three states. The total Board 

membership would be 26 producers and 

15 importer members and respective 

alternates, and one consumer advisor. 

The witness appearing on behalf of 

the Virginia Cotton Growers Association 

and the National Cotton Council 

(VCGA/NCC witness) strongly 

supported the proposed amendments. 

The witness testified that the 

amendments to the Cotton Order, which 

would ultimately provide Kansas, 

Virginia and Florida individual 

representation on the Cotton Board, will 

enhance the Board’s ability to carry out 

its mission. Further, the witness 

indicated that these states have, and 

will continue to contribute funds to the 

Cotton Research and Promotion 

Program. By providing the three states 

with individual representation on the 

Board, the witness stated that it will 

strengthen their support, enhance 

communication from these production 

areas, and better enable the Cotton 

Board to represent the interests of all 

cotton-producing areas in the United 

States. Moreover, the witness said that 

there is no other national research and 

promotion program for Upland cotton 

like the one carried out under the 

Cotton Act. The new representation on 

the Board will not overlap or contradict 

any ongoing promotional activities in 

any region of the Cotton Belt. 

The VCGA/NCC witness stated that 

the addition of individual 

representation for Kansas, Virginia and 

Florida reflects the shift in Upland 

cotton production over the years. For 

example the witness said successful 

completion of the Boll Weevil 

Eradication Program has led to the 

resurgence and expansion of cotton in 

the Southeast, including Virginia and 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
51096 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 191 / Monday, October 5, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

Florida. In addition, improved 

transportation, storage and handling, 

some as a direct result of research 

conducted under the Cotton Act, has led 

to Upland cotton production in Kansas. 

According to the witness, in Virginia 

and Florida, the total economic activity 

generated by cotton production and 

processing exceeds $100 million 

annually in each state. In Kansas, 

acreage expanded rapidly, until 

recently, when prices from competing 

crops reversed the trend. The witness 

stated that the three states continue to 

plant more than 300,000 acres of cotton, 

employ over 3,000 people, and produce 

annual cotton crops valued at $100 

million annually in each state at the 

farm gate. 

The witness commented that the 

Cotton Research and Promotion Program 

funded through producer and importer 

contributions has been highly 

successful. Broader representation will 

facilitate even stronger support and 

enhance participation by producers. In 

addition, the witness urged the 

Secretary to take the necessary action to 

amend the Cotton Order, as this action 

will assure that nearly a thousand 

producers, who account for nearly 5 

percent of annual production, will, for 

the first time, have direct representation 

and input into the program which they 

are helping finance. The witness 

concluded by saying that allowing these 

states direct representation, the Cotton 

Board will be better able to carry out its 

mission and the purpose of the statute, 

to increase the demand for cotton and 

cotton products, will be fulfilled. 

The witness representing the Cotton 

Board testified in support of the 

proposed amendments. The witness 

indicated that the Cotton Board is ready 

to comply with the 2008 Farm Bill and 

any changes to the Cotton Act and 

Cotton Order that governs the Cotton 

Research and Promotion Program. In 

addition, the witness indicated that the 

Board is prepared to include the states 

and their representatives into the Cotton 

Board’s system of governance. The 

witness emphasized that the Cotton 

Board is organized to administratively 

support and finance USDA’s efforts to 

amend the Cotton Order and implement 

the proposed amendments. The witness 

testified that the Cotton Board believes 

that providing Kansas, Virginia, and 

Florida individual representation on the 

Board would enhance the Board’s 

ability to carry out its mission and 

fiduciary responsibility, namely, to 

provide financing for and oversight of 

the Program. The witness added that 

producers in these States have and will 

continue to contribute funds to the 

Program. By providing them individual 

representation on the Cotton Board, the 

witness believes it will strengthen their 

support, enhance communication from 

these production areas, and better 

enable the Cotton Board to represent the 

interests of all cotton-producing areas in 

the United States. The Cotton Board 

witness reiterated the statements made 

by the VCGA/NCC that the Research and 

Promotion Program has been highly 

successful, and that broader 

representation will facilitate even 

stronger support and enhanced 

participation by producers. Moreover, 

the Cotton Board witness affirmed the 

VCGA/NCC witness’ statement that 

nearly 1,000 producers, who account for 

nearly 5 percent of annual production, 

will, for the first time have direct 

representation and input into the 

program which they are helping to 

finance if the amendments were 

implemented. 

Record evidence supports amending 

section 1205.314 of the Order to 

incorporate the States of Kansas, 

Virginia, and Florida into the definition 

of ‘‘cotton-producing State’’ as separate 

States as provided in the 2008 Farm 

Bill. 

Material Issue Number 2 

Section 1205.319 should be amended 

to read as follows: 

‘‘Cotton-production region’’ means 

each of the following groups of cottonproducing States: (a) Southeast Region: 

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North 

Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia; 

(b) Midsouth Region: Arkansas, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, MissouriIllinois, and Tennessee-Kentucky; (c) 

Southwest Region: Kansas, Oklahoma 

and Texas; (d) Western Region: Arizona, 

California-Nevada, and New Mexico. 

The AMS witness testified that AMS 

is proposing to amend the definition of 

cotton-producing region in section 

1205.319 of the Cotton Order to make it 

consistent with the change to the 

definition of cotton-producing state. 

‘‘Cotton-producing region’’ is 

currently defined as each of the 

following groups of cotton-producing 

states: (a) Southeast Region: AlabamaFlorida, Georgia, North CarolinaVirginia, and South Carolina; (b) 

Midsouth Region: Arkansas, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, Missouri-Illinois, and 

Tennessee-Kentucky; (c) Southwest 

Region: Oklahoma and Texas; (d) 

Western Region: Arizona, CaliforniaNevada, and New Mexico.’’ 

Accordingly, record evidence 

supports amending section 1205.319 of 

the Order to amend the definition of 

‘‘cotton-producing region’’ to list 

Kansas, Virginia, and Florida as separate 

states. This change should make the 

section consistent with changes made to 

the definition of ‘‘cotton-producing 

state’’ in section 1205.314 of the Order. 

Material Issue Number 3 

The AMS witness testified that 

conditions exist that warrant the 

omission of a recommended decision in 

this rulemaking proceeding under 7 CFR 

1200.13(d) of the Rules of Practice and 

Procedure with respect to the proposed 

amendments. The 2008 Farm Bill 

provides that this change be made 

during the 2008 crop of cotton. 

Omission of the recommended decision 

would allow the rulemaking to conform 

to this timeline as closely as possible. 

Accordingly, in accordance with section 

1200.13(d) of the rules of practice and 

procedure, it is hereby found and 

determined on the basis of the record 

that due and timely execution of the 

Secretary’s functions imperatively and 

unavoidably requires omission of the 

recommended decision. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act and 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) [5 

U.S.C. 601–612], AMS has considered 

the economic effect of this action on 

small entities and has determined that 

its implementation will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

There are currently approximately 

18,000 producers, and approximately 

16,000 importers that are subject to the 

Cotton Order. In 13 CFR part 121, the 

Small Business Administration (SBA) 

defines small agricultural producers as 

those having annual receipts of no more 

than $750,000 and small agricultural 

service firms (importers) as those having 

annual receipts of no more than $7.0 

million. The majority of these producers 

and importers are small businesses 

under the criteria established by the 

SBA. 

The Cotton Research and Promotion 

Act of 1966 provides authority to 

establish the Cotton Board to administer 

the Cotton Research and Promotion 

Program. In 2009, the Board is 

composed of 38 members and 38 

alternate members (23 producer and 15 

importer members and alternate 

members) and one consumer advisor. 

The Board is responsible for carrying 

out an effective and continuous program 

of research and promotion in order to 

strengthen the competitive position of 

Upland cotton by expanding domestic 

and foreign markets for cotton, 

improving fiber quality, and lowering 

the costs of production. The Program, 

including U.S. Department of 

Agriculture administrative costs, is 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 191 / Monday, October 5, 2009 / Proposed Rules 51097 

financed through producer and importer 

assessments levied on each bale or bale 

equivalent of cotton at a rate of $1 per 

bale with a supplemental (currently 5/ 

10ths of one percent) assessment not to 

exceed 1 percent of the value of lint of 

each bale. There are approximately 

18,000 producers, and approximately 

16,000 importers that are subject to the 

Order. In 2008, the Board collected 

$64.2 million in assessments ($36.2 

million from producers and $28 million 

from importers). 

Interested persons were invited to 

present evidence at the hearing on the 

possible regulatory and informational 

impacts of the proposals on small 

businesses. The amendments proposed 

herein would not result in any 

additional regulatory requirements 

being imposed on cotton producers and 

importers. The proposed amendments to 

the Cotton Order merely reflect the 

statutory changes needed to implement 

the 2008 Farm Bill provisions that 

provided that Kansas, Virginia, and 

Florida be separate states in the 

definition of ‘‘cotton-producing state.’’ 

There are no new information 

collection reports as a result of the 

proposed amendments. Information 

collection requirements and 

recordkeeping provisions contained in 7 

CFR part 1205 have been previously 

approved by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB 

Control Number 0581–0093 under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. Chapter 35). 

Civil Justice Reform 

The amendments herein have been 

reviewed under Executive Order 12988, 

Civil Justice Reform. They are not 

intended to have retroactive effect. If 

adopted, the proposed amendments 

would not preempt any State or local 

laws, regulations, or policies, unless 

they present an irreconcilable conflict 

with this rule. 

The Cotton Act provides that 

administrative proceedings must be 

exhausted before parties may file suit in 

court. Under section 12 of the Cotton 

Act, any person subject to an order may 

file with the Secretary of Agriculture a 

petition stating that the order, any 

provision of the plan, or any obligation 

imposed in connection with the order is 

not in accordance with law and 

requesting a modification of the order or 

to be exempted therefrom. Such person 

is afforded the opportunity for a hearing 

on the petition. After the hearing, the 

Secretary would rule on the petition. 

The Cotton 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, provided a complaint 

is filed within 20 days from the date of 

the entry of ruling. 

Rulings on Briefs of Interested Persons 

Briefs, and the evidence in the record 

were considered in making the findings 

and conclusions set forth in this 

decision. To the extent that the 

suggested findings and conclusions filed 

by interested persons are inconsistent 

with the findings and conclusions of 

this decision, the requests to make such 

findings or to reach such conclusions 

are denied. 

Annexed hereto and made a part 

hereof is the document entitled ‘‘Order 

Amending the Cotton Research and 

Promotion Order.’’ This document has 

been decided upon the detailed and 

appropriate means of effectuating the 

foregoing findings and conclusions. 

It is hereby ordered, that this entire 

decision be published in the Federal 

Register. 

Referendum Order 

Pursuant to the applicable provisions 

of the Cotton Research and Promotion 

Act (7 U.S.C. 2101–2118) it is hereby 

directed that a referendum be conducted 

among the cotton producers and 

importers who have been engaged in the 

production of Upland cotton in the 

United States or who were engaged in 

the importation of Upland cotton or 

cotton-containing products to determine 

whether such producers or importers 

favor the amendments of the said 

annexed Cotton Research and 

Promotion Order. 

The procedure applicable to the 

referendum shall be the procedure for 

the conduct of referenda in connection 

with the Cotton Research and Promotion 

order (7 CFR part 1205.200) as 

published in this issue of the Federal 

Register. The referendum period shall 

be from October 13, 2009, through 

November 10, 2009, provided that 

ballots cast prior to October 13, 2009, 

shall not be invalidated for that reason. 

For the purpose of determining 

producer voter eligibility, the 

representative period is the period 

January 1, 2008 through December 31, 

2008. Producers engaged in the 

production of the 2008 crop during that 

period are eligible to vote in the 

referendum. For the purpose of 

determining importer voter eligibility, 

the 12-month period during which 

qualifying imports of cotton must have 

been made is January 1, 2008, through 

December 31, 2008, and imported such 

products having a value of cotton in 

excess of the de minimis value per line 

item entry would also be eligible to 

vote. 

The agent of the Secretary to conduct 

such referendum is hereby designated to 

be Shethir M. Riva, Chief, Research and 

Promotion Staff, Cotton and Tobacco 

Programs, AMS, USDA, Stop 0224, 1400 

Independence Ave., SW., Room 2637–S, 

Washington, DC 20250–0224, telephone 

(202) 720–6603, facsimile (202) 690– 

1718, or e-mail at 

Shethir.Riva@ams.usda.gov. 

Single copies of the complete text of 

the proposed amendments to the Cotton 

Research and Promotion Order may be 

obtained from any Farm Service Agency 

county office in cotton-producing 

counties or from the Agricultural 

Marketing Service, Cotton and Tobacco 

Programs, Washington, DC 20250. 

It is hereby ordered, That all of this 

decision, referendum order, and 

annexed and Cotton Research and 

Promotion Order be published in the 

Federal Register. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1205 

Advertising, Agricultural research, 

Cotton, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: September 28, 2009. 

Rayne Pegg, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

Order Amending the Order Regulating 

the Cotton Research and Promotion 

Program 

Findings and Determinations 

The findings and determinations 

hereinafter set forth are supplementary 

and in addition to the findings and 

determinations previously made in 

connection with the issuance of the 

Order; and all of said previous findings 

and determinations are hereby ratified 

and affirmed. 

Pursuant to the provisions of the 

Cotton Research and Promotion Act 

(Cotton Act) (7 U.S.C. 2101–2118), and 

the applicable rules of practice and 

procedure effective thereunder (7 CFR 

part 1200), a public hearing was held in 

Washington, DC on December 5, 2008, 

on the proposed amendments to the 

Cotton Research and Promotion Order (7 

CFR part 1205). Upon the basis of the 

evidence introduced at such hearing 

and the record thereof, it is found that: 

(1) The Cotton Order, as amended, as 

hereby proposed to be further amended, 

and all of the terms and conditions 

thereof, will tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act; 

(2) All cotton produced and handled 

in the United States is in the current of 

interstate or foreign commerce or 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
51098 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 191 / Monday, October 5, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

directly burdens, obstructs, or affects 

interstate or foreign commerce in cotton 

and cotton products. 

The provisions of the amended Order 

are set forth in full herein. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1205 

Advertising, Agricultural research, 

Cotton, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR Part 1205 is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 1205—COTTON RESEARCH 

AND PROMOTION 

1. The authority citation 7 CFR part 

1205 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2101–2118 and 7 

U.S.C. 7401. 

2. Revise § 1205.314 to read as 

follows: 

§ 1205.314 Cotton-producing State. 

Cotton-producing State means each of 

the following States and combination of 

States: Alabama; Arizona; Arkansas; 

California-Nevada; Florida; Georgia; 

Kansas; Louisiana; Mississippi; 

Missouri-Illinois; New Mexico; North 

Carolina; Oklahoma; South Carolina; 

Tennessee-Kentucky; Texas; Virginia. 

3. Revise § 1205.319 to read as 

follows: 

§ 1205.319 Cotton-producing region. 

Cotton-producing region means each 

of the following groups of cottonproducing States: 

(a) Southeast Region: Alabama, 

Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South 

Carolina, and Virginia; 

(b) Midsouth Region: Arkansas, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, MissouriIllinois, and Tennessee-Kentucky; 

(c) Southwest Region: Kansas, 

Oklahoma and Texas; 

(d) Western Region: Arizona, 

California-Nevada, and New Mexico. 

[FR Doc. E9–23778 Filed 10–2–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0824; Airspace 

Docket No. 09–AAL–11] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Proposed Revision of Colored Federal 

Airways; Alaska 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to revise 

two Colored Federal Airways, Green 16 

(G–16) and Blue 26 (B–26), in Alaska. 

The FAA is proposing this action in 

preparation of the eventual 

decommissioning of the Barter Island 

(BTI) Non-directional Beacon (NDB) at 

the Village of Kaktovik, Alaska. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 19, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the 

proposal to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001, telephone: 

(202) 366–9826. You must identify FAA 

Docket No. FAA–2009–0824 and 

Airspace Docket No. 09–AAL–11, at the 

beginning of your comments. You may 

also submit comments on the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken 

McElroy, Airspace and Rules Group, 

Office of System Operations Airspace 

and AIM, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in this proposed rulemaking 

by submitting such written data, views, 

or arguments as they may desire. 

Comments that provide the factual basis 

supporting the views and suggestions 

presented are particularly helpful in 

developing reasoned regulatory 

decisions on the proposal. Comments 

are specifically invited on the overall 

regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 

environmental, and energy-related 

aspects of the proposal. 

Communications should identify both 

docket numbers (FAA–2009–0824 and 

Airspace Docket No. 09–AAL–11) and 

be submitted in triplicate to the Docket 

Management Facility (see ADDRESSES

section for address and phone number). 

You may also submit comments through 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Commenters wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

on this action must submit with those 

comments a self-addressed, stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket No. FAA–2009–0824 and 

Airspace Docket No. 09–AAL–11.’’ The 

postcard will be date/time stamped and 

returned to the commenter. 

All communications received on or 

before the specified closing date for 

comments will be considered before 

taking action on the proposed rule. The 

proposal contained in this action may 

be changed in light of comments 

received. All comments submitted will 

be available for examination in the 

public docket both before and after the 

closing date for comments. A report 

summarizing each substantive public 

contact with FAA personnel concerned 

with this rulemaking will be filed in the 

docket. 

Availability of NPRMs 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Recently published rulemaking 

documents can also be accessed through 

the FAA’s Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ 

airspace_amendments/. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received, and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office (see 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number) between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. An informal docket 

may also be examined during normal 

business hours at the office of the 

Regional Air Traffic Division, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th 

Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513– 

7587. 

Persons interested in being placed on 

a mailing list for future NPRM’s should 

contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, 

(202) 267–9677, for a copy of Advisory 

Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking Distribution System, which 

describes the application procedure. 

The Proposal 

The FAA is proposing an amendment 

to the Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR part 71), that 

would revise two Colored Federal 

Airways, G–16 and B–26 by removing 

the segment to the BTI NDB from each 

airway description. In a separate action, 

one Area Navigation (RNAV) route T– 

228 was revised, and T–73 was 

established to continue IFR service to 

Village of Kaktovik, Alaska. The BTI 

NDB decommissioning proposal was 

publicly circulated in notice number 

06–AAL–49NR. After reviewing public 

comment, the FAA decided that keeping 

the NDB was not feasible and that it 

should be decommissioned. 

The FAA has determined that this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 

regulations for which frequent and 

routine amendments are necessary to 

keep them operationally current. 

Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS