Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 83 / Tuesday, May 1, 2007 / Proposed Rules 23777 

a sample meets the general appearance 

criteria for the special grade designation 

‘‘Purple Mottled or Stained.’’ 

14. In consideration of the fact that 

the overall appearance of the product is 

an important consideration for some 

customers, should we create other 

general appearance images? What 

appearance factors are of greatest 

interest? (Visual reference images/ 

general appearance factors may be 

viewed on the GIPSA Web site at: http:// 

www.gipsa.usda.gov/GIPSA/webapp? 

area=home&subject=grpi&topic=sq-isd.) 

Basis of Determination 

As provided in 9 CFR 810.1603, Basis 

of determination, ‘‘each determination 

of class, heat-damaged kernels, damaged 

kernels, splits, and soybeans of other 

colors is made on the basis of the grain 

when free from foreign material. 

Inspectors make other determinations 

not specifically provided for under the 

general provisions on the basis of the 

grain as a whole.’’ For example, 

inspectors determine moisture content 

on the sample as a whole. 

15. What basis of determination is 

used in the marketplace for the various 

factors? Why does the marketplace use 

that basis? 

16. Would there be any positive or 

detrimental consequences if we were to 

determine all factors on the basis of a 

sample when free from foreign matter? 

Food Grade Soybeans 

17. Should we establish a separate 

standard, for example, U.S. Standards 

for Food Grade Soybeans or a separate 

grade level, class, or special grade 

within the existing soybeans standards 

for food-grade soybeans? Please provide 

as much detail as possible as to: 

a. Explain why. 

b. What would a new standard look 

like or what would the grade limits be 

for a new grade level? 

We are committed to provide marketrelevant soybean standards. We 

welcome your comments on these issues 

as well as any comments or suggestions 

on changes to the soybean standards 

and grading procedures. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71–87. 

James E. Link, 

Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and 

Stockyards Administration. 

[FR Doc. E7–8291 Filed 4–30–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–KD–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 929 

[Docket No. AMS–FV–07–0034; FV07–929– 

1] 

Cranberries Grown in the States of 

Massachusetts, Rhode Island, 

Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, 

Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, 

Washington, and Long Island in the 

State of New York; Continuance 

Referendum 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Referendum order. 

SUMMARY: This document directs that a 

continuance referendum be conducted 

among eligible growers of cranberries in 

the States of Massachusetts, Rhode 

Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, 

Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, 

Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in 

the State of New York to determine 

whether they favor continuance of the 

marketing order regulating the handling 

of cranberries grown in the production 

area. 

DATES: The referendum will be 

conducted from May 17 through May 

31, 2007. To vote in this referendum, 

growers must have been engaged in 

producing cranberries within the 

production area during the period 

September 1, 2005, through August 31, 

2006. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the marketing 

order may be obtained from USDA, 

Washington, DC Marketing Field Office, 

4700 River Road, Unit 155, Riverdale, 

Maryland 20737, or the Office of the 

Docket Clerk, Marketing Order 

Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, Agricultural 

Marketing Service, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Stop 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia A. Petrella or Kenneth G. 

Johnson, Marketing Order 

Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, Unit 

155, 4700 River Road, Riverdale, MD 

20737; telephone: (301) 734–5243, Fax: 

(301) 734–5275; or e-mail at: 

Kenneth.Johnson@usda.gov or 

Patricia.Petrella@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to Marketing Order No. 929 (7 CFR part 

929), hereinafter referred to as the 

‘‘order,’’ and the applicable provisions 

of the Agricultural Marketing 

Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 

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

as the ‘‘Act,’’ it is hereby directed that 

a referendum be conducted to ascertain 

whether continuance of the order is 

favored by growers. The referendum 

shall be conducted during the period 

May 17 through May 31, 2007, among 

eligible cranberry growers in the 

production area. Only growers that were 

engaged in the production of cranberries 

in the States of Massachusetts, Rhode 

Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, 

Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, 

Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in 

the State of New York during the period 

of September 1, 2005, through August 

31, 2006, may participate in the 

continuance referendum. 

USDA has determined that 

continuance referenda are an effective 

means for determining whether growers 

favor continuation of marketing order 

programs. The USDA would not 

consider termination of the order if 

more than 50 percent of the growers 

who vote in the referendum and growers 

of more than 50 percent of the volume 

of cranberries represented in the 

referendum favor continuance of their 

program. 

In evaluating the merits of 

continuance versus termination, the 

USDA will not only consider the results 

of the continuance referendum. The 

USDA will also consider all other 

relevant information concerning the 

operation of the order and the relative 

benefits and disadvantages to growers, 

processors, and consumers in order to 

determine whether continued operation 

of the order would tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

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

Chapter 35), the ballot materials used in 

the referendum herein ordered have 

been previously approved by the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) 

under OMB No. 0581–0189, OMB 

Generic Fruit Crops. It has been 

estimated that it will take an average of 

20 minutes for each of the 

approximately 1,100 producers of 

cranberries in the production area to 

cast a ballot. Participation is voluntary. 

Ballots postmarked after May 31, 2007, 

will be marked invalid and not included 

in the vote tabulation. 

Kenneth G. Johnson, Patricia A. 

Petrella and Dawana Clark of the 

Washington, DC Marketing Field Office, 

Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA, 

are hereby designated as the referendum 

agents of USDA to conduct such 

referendum. The procedure applicable 

to the referendum shall be the 

‘‘Procedure for the Conduct of 

Referenda in Connection With 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
23778 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 83 / Tuesday, May 1, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

1 Imbalance Provisions for Intermittent Resources 

Assessing the State of Wind Energy in Wholesale 

Electricity Markets, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 

70 FR 21349 (Apr. 26, 2005), FERC Stats. & Regs. 

¿ 32,581 (2005). 

2 For purposes of the NOPR, an intermittent 

resource was defined as an electric generator that 

is not dispatchable and cannot store its fuel source 

and therefore cannot respond to changes in system 

demand or respond to transmission security 

constraints. 

3 Promoting Wholesale Competition Through 

Open Access Non-discriminatory Transmission 

Services by Public Utilities and Recovery of 

Stranded Costs by Public Utilities and Transmitting 

Utilities, Order No. 888, 61 FR 21,540 (May 10, 

1996), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¿ 31,036 (1996), order 

on reh’g, Order No. 888–A, 62 FR 12,274 (March 14, 

1997), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¿ 31,048 (1997), order 

on reh’g, Order No. 888–B, 81 FERC ¿ 61,248 

(1997), order on reh’g, Order No. 888–C, 82 FERC 

¿ 61,046 (1998), aff’d in relevant part, remanded in 

part on other grounds sub nom. Transmission 

Access Policy Study Group, et al. v. FERC, 225 F.3d 

667 (D.C. Cir. 2000), aff’d sub nom. New York v. 

FERC, 535 U.S. 1 (2002). 

4 The Commission began exploring these issues 

at a technical conference held on December 1, 2004, 

in Denver, Colorado in Docket No. AD04–13–000. 

Other transmission-related issues regarding wind 

energy were also discussed at the technical 

conference and in post-technical conference 

comments, such as the interconnection process, 

credits for transmission upgrades, and adoption of 

a conditional firm transmission product. These 

issues were not addressed in the NOPR, which was 

limited to the imbalance provisions of the pro 

forma OATT as they relate to intermittent 

resources. 

5 See Preventing Undue Discrimination and 

Preference in Transmission Service, Order No. 890, 

72 FR 12266 (March 15, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. 

¿ 31,241 (2007), reh’g pending. 

6 Order No. 890 at P 663. 

7 Id. The Commission also adopted a standard 

definition of intermittent resource that is identical 

to that proposed in this proceeding. See Id. at P 666. 

Marketing Orders for Fruits, Vegetables, 

and Nuts Pursuant to the Agricultural 

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as 

Amended’’ (7 CFR 900.400 et seq.). 

Ballots will be mailed to all growers 

of record and may also be obtained from 

the referendum agents and from their 

appointees. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 929 

Cranberries, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

Dated: April 25, 2007. 

Lloyd C. Day, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–8233 Filed 4–30–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 35 

[Docket Nos. RM05–10–000 and AD04–13– 

000] 

Imbalance Provisions for Intermittent 

Resources; Assessing the State of 

Wind Energy in Wholesale Electricity 

Markets 

Issued April 25, 2007. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Withdrawal of notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission is withdrawing 

its proposal to amend its regulations to 

require public utilities to append to 

their open access transmission tariffs 

(OATTs) an intermittent generator 

imbalance service schedule in light of 

the imbalance-related reforms adopted 

in Order No. 890, 72 FR 12266 (Mar. 15, 

2007). 

DATES: The notice of proposed 

rulemaking published on April 14, 

2005, at 70 FR 21349, is withdrawn as 

of May 1, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

W. Mason Emnett (Legal Information), 

Office of the General Counsel—Energy 

Markets, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502– 

6540. 

Daniel Hedberg (Technical Information), 

Office of Energy Markets and 

Reliability, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502– 

6243. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Before Commissioners: Joseph T. 

Kelliher, Chairman; Suedeen G. Kelly, 

Marc Spitzer, Philip D. Moeller, and 

Jon Wellinghoff. 

Withdrawal of Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

1. On April 14, 2005, the Commission 

issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NOPR) in this proceeding.1 For the 

reasons set forth below, we are 

withdrawing the NOPR and terminating 

this rulemaking. 

2. In the NOPR, the Commission 

proposed to clarify and amend 

imbalance-related provisions in the pro 

forma Open Access Transmission Tariff 

(OATT) as applied to intermittent 

resources.2 The Commission concluded 

that, although the number of 

intermittent resources had grown since 

the adoption of the pro forma OATT in 

Order No. 888,3 such resources were 

historically hesitant to take service 

under the pro forma OATT, thereby 

accessing broader markets, due to the 

application of imbalance provisions that 

were designed to apply to resources 

with the ability to control fuel input and 

thus schedule their energy with 

precision. The Commission concluded 

that the imbalance provisions of the 

Order No. 888 pro forma OATT may no 

longer be just, reasonable or not unduly 

discriminatory or preferential as applied 

to intermittent resources that by nature 

are weather-driven.4 The Commission 

therefore proposed to establish a 

standard schedule under the pro forma 

OATT to address generator imbalances 

solely for intermittent resources and 

sought comment on issues related to 

that proposal. 

3. Since issuance of the NOPR, the 

Commission has completed its OATT 

reform rulemaking in Docket Nos. 

RM05–25–000, et al., issuing Order No. 

890 on February 16, 2007.5 Among other 

things, Order No. 890 adopted a new 

Schedule 9 to govern generator 

imbalances. Under Schedule 9, 

imbalance charges ‘‘must be based on 

incremental cost or some multiple 

therefore’’ and ‘‘must provide an 

incentive for accurate scheduling, such 

as by increasing the percentage of the 

adder above (and below) incremental 

cost as the deviation becomes larger.’’ 6

Of particular relevance to this 

proceeding, the Commission also 

required that imbalance provisions 

‘‘account for the special circumstances 

presented by intermittent generators and 

their limited ability to precisely forecast 

or control generation levels, such as 

waiving the more punitive adders 

associated with higher deviations.’’ 7

4. As a result of the imbalance-related 

reforms adopted in Order No. 890, and 

in particular the requirement that 

generator imbalance provisions in each 

transmission provider’s OATT take into 

account an intermittent resources’ 

limited ability to forecast or control 

generation levels, the Commission 

concludes that it is no longer necessary 

to address the NOPR proposal to add to 

the pro forma OATT a generator 

imbalance schedule solely for 

intermittent resources. The reforms 

adopted in Order No. 890 adequately 

ensure that the imbalance provisions of 

the pro forma OATT will not result in 

service to intermittent resources that is 

unjust, unreasonable, or unduly 

discriminatory or preferential. 

5. The Commission therefore 

withdraws the NOPR and terminates 

this rulemaking proceeding. 

The Commission orders: 

Docket No. RM05–10–000 is hereby 

terminated. 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS