14712 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR parts 916 and 917 are 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

parts 916 and 917 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

PART 916—NECTARINES GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

2. Add § 916.141 to read as follows: 

§ 916.141 Delinquent assessments. 

(a) The Nectarine Administrative 

Committee shall impose a late payment 

charge on any assessment that has not 

been received in the Nectarine 

Administrative Committee’s office, or 

legibly postmarked by the U.S. Postal 

Service, within 60 days of the invoice 

date shown on the handler’s assessment 

statement. The late payment charge 

shall be 10 percent of the unpaid 

balance. 

(b) In addition to that specified in 

paragraph (a) of this section, the 

Nectarine Administrative Committee 

shall impose an interest charge on any 

assessment payment that has not been 

received in the committee’s office, or 

legibly postmarked by the U.S. Postal 

Service, within 60-days of the invoice 

date. The interest charge shall be 1.5 

percent per month and shall be applied 

to the unpaid balance and late payment 

charge for the number of days all or any 

part of the assessment specified in the 

handler’s assessment statement is 

delinquent beyond the 60-day payment 

period. 

PART 917—PEACHES GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

3. Add § 917.137 to read as follows: 

§ 917.137 Delinquent assessments. 

(a) The Peach Commodity Committee 

shall impose a late payment charge on 

any assessment that has not been 

received in the Peach Commodity 

Committee’s office, or legibly 

postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service, 

within 60 days of the invoice date 

shown on the handler’s assessment 

statement. The late payment charge 

shall be 10 percent of the unpaid 

balance. 

(b) In addition to that specified in 

paragraph (a) of this section, the Peach 

Commodity Committee shall impose an 

interest charge on any assessment 

payment that has not been received in 

the Peach Commodity Committee’s 

office, or legibly postmarked by the U.S. 

Postal Service, within 60 days of the 

invoice date. The interest charge shall 

be 1.5 percent per month and shall be 

applied to the unpaid balance and late 

payment charge for the number of days 

all or any part of the assessment 

specified in the handler’s assessment 

statement is delinquent beyond the 60- 

day payment period. 

Dated: March 23, 2007. 

Kenneth C. Clayton, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–5789 Filed 3–28–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Rural Business-Cooperative Service 

Rural Utilities Service 

7 CFR Part 4290 

RIN 0570–AA35 

Rural Business Investment Program 

AGENCY: Rural Business-Cooperative 

Service and the Rural Utilities Service, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

ACTION: Advanced notice of proposed 

rulemaking; comments requested. 

SUMMARY: The Rural BusinessCooperative Service and the Rural 

Utilities Service seek public input 

regarding the possibility of operating the 

Rural Business Investment Program, in 

light of the loss of funding starting in 

the 2007 Fiscal Year, to provide for nonleveraged Rural Business Investment 

Companies. 

DATES: Written or e-mail comments on 

this advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking must be received on or 

before 30 days from the date of 

publication in the Federal Register. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

to this rule by any of the following 

methods: 

• Agency Web Site: http:// 

www.rurdev.usda.gov/regs. Follow 

instructions for submitting comments 

on the Web Site. 

• E-Mail: comments@wdc.usda.gov. 

Include the RIN No. 0570—in the 

subject line of the message. 

• 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Foore, Program Advisor, Rural 

Development, Business and Cooperative 

Programs, 1400 Independence Ave., 

SW., Stop 3201, Washington, DC 20250–

3201, Telephone: (202) 690–4730. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Order 12866 

This advance notice has been 

reviewed under Executive Order 12866 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget and has been determined to be 

significant for the purposes of Executive 

Order 12866. 

Background 

The Rural Development Mission Area 

of the Department of Agriculture (Rural 

Development) is responsible for 

assisting rural communities in 

improving the quality of life for their 

residents and in increasing their 

economic opportunities. Most of the 

programs and activities of Rural 

Development provide assistance in the 

form of loans, loan guarantees, and 

grants. However, Rural Development 

estimates that at least $1.45 trillion of 

equity in rural America is idle and 

could be used to assist the development 

of rural America. 

In an attempt to tap this equity in 

rural America and provide for 

investment capital opportunities which 

are not widely available, Congress 

created the Rural Business Investment 

Program in section 6029 of the Farm 

Security and Rural Investment Act of 

2002 (Pub. L. 107–171; 116 Stat. 134). 

The Rural Business Investment Program 

authorized the Secretary of Agriculture 

to encourage, with financial and 

technical assistance, the creation of 

investment companies, called Rural 

Business Investment Companies, which 

would provide equity investments to 

rural small businesses. These 

investment companies would leverage 

capital raised from private investors, 

including rural residents into 

investments in rural small businesses. 

The legislation strongly encouraged that 

the Secretary of Agriculture operate this 

Program with the assistance of the Small 

Business Administration (SBA) because 

it was modeled after the SBA Small 

Business Investment Program. The 

legislation even provided funding to 

cover SBA’s costs of providing such 

assistance. On June 8, 2004, Rural 

Development promulgated an interim 

rule to implement the Rural Business 

Investment Program [7 CFR part 4290; 

69 FR 32200]. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 14713 

The legislation that created the Rural 

Business Investment Program gave the 

Secretary of Agriculture two choices 

concerning the creation of Rural 

Business Investment Companies: 

leveraged and non-leveraged. A 

leveraged Rural Business Investment 

Company is a company that is created 

with an infusion of Federal capital. A 

non-leveraged Rural Business 

Investment Company is a company that 

is created without the infusion of 

Federal capital. Since the legislation 

authorizing this Program provided 

funds for leveraged Rural Business 

Investment Companies and SBA’s own 

programs operate with leveraged 

entities, the focus of the current Rural 

Business Investment Program has been 

on the creation of leveraged Rural 

Business Investment Companies. Since 

the promulgation of the interim rule, 

Rural Development, with SBA’s 

support, has conditionally selected 

three leveraged Rural Business 

Investment Companies. These 

companies have initiated the process of 

making equity investments in rural 

small businesses. 

Issue 

With the enactment of section 1403 of 

the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub. 

L. 109–171; 120 Stat. 4), all unobligated 

funds for the Rural Business Investment 

Program for administrative costs for 

SBA and for the assistance grants and 

leveraging for the Rural Business 

Investment Companies will be 

rescinded at the end of Fiscal Year 2006. 

The enactment of this legislation 

effectively prevents the funding and 

support of new Rural Business 

Investment Companies after the end of 

this Fiscal Year. 

Rural Development believes that a 

greater focus on tapping the equity in 

rural America for the purposes of 

furthering rural development should be 

maintained. By encouraging 

investments in rural businesses with 

rural equity, not only is there the 

development of an underutilized rural 

resource, but also there is the potential 

to use such investments to increase 

wealth in rural communities. 

The development of renewable energy 

resources such as biofuels and wind 

represents an example of the economic 

development power of tapping rural 

equity. The development of these new 

energy resources has reached a stage 

where it is possible to find capital in the 

United States and elsewhere to develop 

many of these rural resources. While the 

rural areas where these outside funded 

projects are located will reap some 

economic benefits, the profits and 

equity they create will be owned by 

those outside these rural communities. 

Rural Development believes that if at 

least a portion of the funding of these 

projects can be supported by the equity 

in the surrounding rural communities, 

the projects are likely to be more 

successful because they will have 

greater local support and generate 

profits and equity that will be retained 

in the these rural communities which 

could be applied to support further 

development. 

Potential Strategies for Continuation of 

the Rural Business Investment Program 

Rural Development seeks to 

encourage not only the placement of 

economic development projects in rural 

areas, like an ethanol plant, but also the 

development of business and 

investment models that will lead to the 

greater use of, and growth in, wealth, 

equity, and economic opportunities in 

rural communities. For these reasons, 

Rural Development would like to 

investigate whether there may be a way 

to continue the Rural Business 

Investment Program, despite the 

enactment of the Deficit Reduction Act 

of 2005, as part of a strategy to help 

unlock the potential power that rural 

equity has to finance rural development 

in a manner that will help rural 

residents share in the benefits of the 

economic growth potential of rural 

America. 

After reviewing the legislation 

creating the Rural Business Investment 

Program, it may be possible for the 

Secretary of Agriculture to operate this 

Program with another partner. The 

legislation authorizing the Rural 

Business Investment Program 

authorized certain financial institutions 

to create and invest in Rural Business 

Investment Companies (7 U.S.C. 

2009cc–9). Eligible financial institutions 

include banks and savings associations 

whose deposits are insured by the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 

and Farm Credit System institutions. 

The Farm Credit Administration (FCA), 

the independent Federal agency that 

regulates the Farm Credit System, is 

responsible for the chartering, oversight 

and examination of the financial 

institutions of the Farm Credit System 

(FCS). Additionally, FCA has 

experience in examining other nonSystem institutions, such as Small 

Business Investment Companies. 

Therefore, FCA has the expertise to 

operate the non-leveraged program for 

the Secretary of Agriculture. If the focus 

of this Program shifted to the creation of 

non-leveraged Rural Business 

Investment Companies, the only funds 

that would be needed would be 

administrative costs to administer the 

program and provide technical 

assistance. It is Rural Development’s 

understanding that these funds could be 

raised through the fees the FCA can 

currently charge regulated entities. If the 

FCA would become a partner of this 

Program, provisions would be made to 

ensure that non-Farm Credit System 

members would be allowed to 

participate in the creation and financing 

of non-leveraged Rural Business 

Investment Companies in accordance 

with the statute. This proposal is based 

on a comment Rural Development 

received from the FCA during the 

interim rule commenting period for the 

Rural Business Investment Program [69 

FR 32200; June 8, 2004]. 

Requests for Comments 

Rural Development is seeking help 

from the public regarding the following 

questions related to this matter: 

(1) In what ways can Rural 

Development leverage the Rural 

Business Investment Program, a 

developmental venture capital program, 

to help encourage an expanded use of 

rural equity in the development of rural 

America? 

(2) Does the Rural Business 

Investment Program provide an 

appropriate basis to encourage the 

expanded use of rural equity in rural 

development? If not, are there changes 

in the regulation that could be made to 

make the Program more effective? 

(3) If USDA chooses to use one or 

more partners in order to provide for the 

licensing of non-leveraged Rural 

Business Investment Companies, what 

type of considerations should be made? 

How could such a partnership, between 

USDA and FCA, be made most effective 

for USDA, FCA, and the rural business 

community? If other Federal agencies in 

addition to FCA wish to become a 

partner, how should this be addressed 

within the regulation? 

Dated: March 21, 2007. 

Thomas C. Dorr, 

Under Secretary, Rural Development. 

[FR Doc. 07–1530 Filed 3–28–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–XY–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Part 50 

[Docket No. PRM–50–83] 

Project on Government Oversight and 

Union of Concerned Scientists; 

Receipt of Petition for Rulemaking 

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS