1912 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 10 / Wednesday, January 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

1To view the interim rule, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, click on the ‘‘Advanced 

Search’’ tab, and select ‘‘Docket Search.’’ In the 

Docket ID field, enter APHIS–2006–0117, then click 

‘‘Submit.’’ Clicking on the Docket ID link in the 

search results page will produce a list of all 

documents in the docket. 

PART 890—FEDERAL EMPLOYEES 

HEALTH BENEFITS PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 890 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 8913; § 890.303 also 

issued under 50 U.S.C. 403p, 22 U.S.C. 4069c 

and 4069c–1; subpart L also issued under 

sec. 599 C of Pub. L 101–513, 104 Stat. 2064, 

as amended; § 890.102 also issued under 

sections 11202(f), 11232(e), and 11246(b) and 

(c) of Pub. L. 105–33, 111 Stat. 251; and 

section 721 of Pub. L. 105–261, 112 Stat. 

2061 unless otherwise noted. 

■ 2. In § 890.301 add new paragraph 

(i)(4)(iv) to read as follows: 

§ 890.301 Opportunities for employees 

who are not participants in premium 

conversion to enroll or change enrollment; 

effective dates. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(iv) If the discontinuance of the plan, 

whether permanent or temporary, is due 

to a disaster, an employee must change 

the enrollment within 60 days of the 

disaster, as announced by OPM. If an 

employee does not change the 

enrollment within the time frame 

announced by OPM, the employee will 

be considered to be enrolled in the 

standard option of the Blue Cross and 

Blue Shield Service Benefit Plan. The 

effective date of enrollment changes 

under this provision will be set by OPM 

when it makes the announcement 

allowing such changes. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 890.306 add new paragraph 

(1)(4)(v) to read as follows: 

§ 890.306 When can annuitants or survivor 

annuitants change enrollment or reenroll 

and what are the effective dates? 

* * * * * 

(1) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(v) If the discontinuance of the plan, 

whether permanent or temporary, is due 

to a disaster, an annuitant must change 

the enrollment within 60 days of the 

disaster, as announced by OPM. If an 

annuitant does not change the 

enrollment within the time frame 

announced by OPM, the annuitant will 

be considered to be enrolled in the 

standard option of the Blue Cross and 

Blue Shield Service Benefit Plan. The 

effective date of enrollment changes 

under this provision will be set by OPM 

when it makes the announcement 

allowing such changes. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 890.806 add new paragraph 

(j)(4)(iv) to read as follows: 

§ 890.806 When can former spouses 

change enrollment or reenroll and what are 

the effective dates? 

* * * * * 

(j) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(iv) If the discontinuance of the plan, 

whether permanent or temporary, is due 

to a disaster, the former spouse must 

change the enrollment within 60 days of 

the disaster, as announced by OPM. If 

the former spouse does not change the 

enrollment within the time frame 

announced by OPM, the former spouse 

will be considered to be enrolled in the 

standard option of the Blue Cross and 

Blue Shield Service Benefit Plan. The 

effective date of enrollment changes 

under this provision will be set by OPM 

when it makes the announcement 

allowing such changes. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. In § 890.1108 add new paragraph 

(h)(4)(iv) to read as follows: 

§ 890.1108 Opportunities to change 

enrollment; effective dates. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(iv) If the discontinuance of the plan, 

whether permanent or temporary, is due 

to a disaster, the enrollee must change 

the enrollment within 60 days of the 

disaster, as announced by OPM. If the 

enrollee does not change the enrollment 

within the time frame announced by 

OPM, the enrollee will be considered to 

be enrolled in the standard option of the 

Blue Cross and Blue Shield Service 

Benefit Plan. The effective date of 

enrollment changes under this provision 

will be set by OPM when it makes the 

announcement allowing such changes. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–533 Filed 1–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6325–39–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

7 CFR Part 301 

[Docket No. APHIS–2006–0117] 

Pine Shoot Beetle; Additions to 

Quarantined Areas 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Affirmation of interim rule as 

final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting as a final 

rule, without change, an interim rule 

that amended the pine shoot beetle 

regulations by adding counties in 

Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, New Jersey, New 

York, and Ohio to the list of quarantined 

areas and by designating the States of 

Michigan, Minnesota, and 

Pennsylvania, in their entirety, as 

quarantined areas based on their 

decision not to enforce intrastate 

movement restrictions. The interim rule 

also added the States of Connecticut and 

Rhode Island, in their entirety, to the 

list of quarantined areas based on 

projections of the natural spread of pine 

shoot beetle that make it reasonable to 

believe that the pest is present in those 

States. The interim rule was necessary 

to prevent the spread of pine shoot 

beetle, a pest of pine trees, into 

noninfested areas of the United States. 

DATES: Effective on January 17, 2007, we 

are adopting as a final rule the interim 

rule published at 71 FR 58243–58246 on 

October 3, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Weyman Fussell, Program Manager, Pest 

Detection and Management Programs, 

PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 134, 

Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734–

5705. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The regulations in 7 CFR 301.50 

through 301.50–10 (referred to below as 

the regulations) restrict the interstate 

movement of certain regulated articles 

from quarantined areas in order to 

prevent the spread of pine shoot beetle 

(PSB) into noninfested areas of the 

United States. 

In an interim rule 1 effective and 

published in the Federal Register on 

October 3, 2006 (71 FR 58243–58246, 

Docket No. APHIS–2006–0117), we 

amended the regulations by adding Jo 

Daviess and Stark Counties, IL; 

Dearborn County, IN; Dubuque and 

Scott Counties, IA; Bergen, Hunterdon, 

Passaic, Sussex, and Warren Counties, 

NJ; Columbia, Orange, and Ulster 

Counties, NY; and Highland, Jackson, 

Ross, and Scioto Counties, OH, to the 

list of quarantined areas in § 301.50–

3(c). In addition, we designated the 

States of Michigan, Minnesota, and 

Pennsylvania, in their entirety, as 

quarantined areas based on their 

decision not to enforce intrastate 

movement restrictions. Finally, we 

added the States of Connecticut and 

Rhode Island, in their entirety, to the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 10 / Wednesday, January 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 1913 

list of quarantined areas based on 

projections of the natural spread of PSB 

that make it reasonable to believe that 

the pest is present in those States. 

Comments on the interim rule were 

required to be received on or before 

December 4, 2006. We did not receive 

any comments. Therefore, for the 

reasons given in the interim rule, we are 

adopting the interim rule as a final rule. 

This action also affirms the 

information contained in the interim 

rule concerning Executive Order 12866 

and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 

Executive Orders 12372 and 12988, and 

the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

Further, for this action, the Office of 

Management and Budget has waived its 

review under Executive Order 12866. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301 

Agricultural commodities, Plant 

diseases and pests, Quarantine, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Transportation. 

PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE 

NOTICES 

■ Accordingly, we are adopting as a 

final rule, without change, the interim 

rule that amended 7 CFR part 301 and 

that was published at 71 FR 58243–

58246 on October 3, 2006. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 10th day of 

January 2007. 

W. Ron DeHaven, 

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–505 Filed 1–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Grain Inspection, Packers and 

Stockyards Administration 

7 CFR Part 868 

RIN 0580–AA92 

Fees for Rice Inspection Services 

AGENCY: Grain Inspection Packers and 

Stockyards Administration, USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule revises the 

regulations governing the sampling, 

inspection, weighing, and certification 

for rice by increasing certain fees 

charged for the services by 

approximately 18 percent. Further, the 

rice fees increase an additional 3 

percent each year through fiscal year 

2010 and establish a stowage 

examination fee. These revisions are 

necessary in order to recover, as nearly 

as practicable, the costs of performing 

these services under the Agricultural 

Marketing Act of 1946 (AMA). 

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 16, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information concerning program 

operations, contact John Giler, Deputy 

Director, Field Management Division, at 

his E-mail address: 

john.c.giler@usda.gov or by telephone 

(202) 720–0228. For information 

concerning fee development contact, 

contact Ms. Patricia Donohue-Galvin, 

Director, Budget and Planning Staff, at 

her E-mail address: patricia.donohuegalvin@usda.gov or by telephone (202) 

690–0231. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The AMA authorizes official 

inspection and weighing services, on a 

user-fee basis, of rice (7 U.S.C. 1622(h)). 

The AMA provides that reasonable fees 

be collected from the users of the 

services to cover, as nearly as 

practicable, the costs of the services 

rendered. 

The regulations in 7 CFR 868 list user 

fees for inspection and weighing 

services provided by the Grain 

Inspection, Packers and Stockyards 

Administration (GIPSA or Agency). This 

final rule amends the schedule for fees 

and charges for inspection and weighing 

services that GIPSA provides to the rice 

industry to reflect the costs necessary to 

operate the program. 

GIPSA receives no directly 

appropriated funds to provide 

inspection and weighing services. Our 

ability to provide these services 

depends on user fees. 

For our user fees to cover our costs so 

that we can continue to provide services 

and to inform our customers of user fees 

in time for advance planning, we 

proposed to set user fees for our 

inspection and weighing services for 

fiscal years 2007 through 2010. 

GIPSA regularly reviews its user fee 

programs to determine if the fees are 

adequate. While GIPSA continues to 

search for opportunities to reduce its 

costs, the existing fee schedule will not 

generate sufficient revenues to cover 

program costs while maintaining the 

Agency 3-month operating reserve. 

The cost of operating the rice program 

was $4.4 million during fiscal year 2006 

and will increase to approximately $4.8 

million by fiscal year 2010. These cost 

increases are due to estimated annual 

cost of living adjustments for employee 

salaries and benefits, equipment 

replacement, and information 

technology upgrades. Replacing aging 

rice inspection equipment will cost 

approximately $50,000. An information 

technology upgrade to improve 

certification efficiency and program 

management will cost approximately 

$300,000. The estimated costs 

incorporate plans to introduce program 

changes that will better control 

increases in long-term costs. 

We designed the revised fee structure 

to fund the rice program this fiscal year 

and future fiscal years to avoid a 

continued program deficit. The 

combination of the initial 18 percent 

increase and the subsequent annual 3 

percent increases will ultimately cover 

the program’s operating cost and 

replenish the 3-month retained earnings 

balance. 

We are also establishing a new fee for 

stowage examination services that we 

will provide as a service upon request. 

In the April 11, 2006 Federal Register 

(71 FR 18231–18236), we invited 

comments on our proposed rule 

identifying changes to the user fees we 

charge for rice inspection and weighing 

services. We solicited comments 

concerning our proposal for 60 days 

ending June 12, 2006. By the close of the 

comment period, we received two 

comments; one from representatives of a 

rice mill and one from a rice industry 

organization. Both commenters opposed 

the fee increases. The issues raised in 

these comments are discussed below. 

The comments, one from a rice 

industry trade organization and one 

from a rice mill, both opposed the fee 

increases. The trade organization stated 

that the fee increase was excessive and 

would lead to a reduction in service 

requested from the industry, resulting in 

a continuing cycle of fee increases. It 

also said that the fee increase was 

preemptive and premature considering 

the continuing nature of discussion on 

privatization. 

The trade organization indicated that 

GIPSA should eliminate costs, redesign 

its delivery system in certain locations, 

and it offered to work with GIPSA to 

evaluate options. 

The rice mill stated that the fees 

charged by GIPSA were much higher 

than private industry and that the 

increase would force the industry to 

look for alternatives. The mill also 

questioned a statement in the proposed 

rule concerning the voluntary nature of 

the inspection service, because GIPSA is 

the only agency issuing USDA Rice 

Inspection Certificates. 

We disagree with these comments. 

The rice inspection program is 

authorized under the AMA of 1946 and 

funded by user fees. The rice fees were 

last revised in 2003. Since that time, 

costs have increased and retained 

earnings have been depleted. Without 

mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES