Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Notices 62339 

1To view the notice and the pest risk analysis, 

go to http://www.regulations.gov/ 

#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0037. 

comments in writing. Written 

submissions may contain information 

other than that presented at the oral 

presentation. Anyone may submit 

written comments at the meeting. 

Persons submitting written comments at 

the meeting are asked to provide sixteen 

copies. 

Interested persons may visit http:// 

www.ams.usda.gov to view NOSB 

recommendations, meeting agenda, and 

submit and/or view public comments. 

Dated: September 29, 2011. 

David Shipman, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–25551 Filed 10–6–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

[Docket No. APHIS–2011–0037] 

Notice of Decision To Allow Interstate 

Movement of Rambutan From Puerto 

Rico into the Continental United States 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: We are advising the public of 

our decision to begin allowing the 

interstate movement into the 

continental United States of fresh 

rambutan fruit from Puerto Rico. Based 

on the findings of a pest risk analysis, 

which we made available to the public 

for review and comment through a 

previous notice, we believe that the 

application of one or more designated 

phytosanitary measures will be 

sufficient to mitigate the risks of 

introducing or disseminating plant pests 

or noxious weeds via the interstate 

movement of rambutan from Puerto 

Rico. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 7, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Philip Grove, Regulatory Coordinator, 

PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 156, 

Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734– 

6280. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Under the regulations in ‘‘Subpart— 

Regulated Articles From Hawaii and the 

Territories’’ (7 CFR 318.13–1 through 

318.13–26, referred to below as the 

regulations), the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture 

prohibits or restricts the interstate 

movement of fruits and vegetables into 

the United States from Hawaii, Puerto 

Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and 

the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands to prevent plant pests 

and noxious weeds from being 

introduced into and spread within the 

continental United States. (The 

continental United States is defined in 

318.13–2 of the regulations as the 48 

contiguous States, Alaska, and the 

District of Columbia.) 

Section 318.13–4 contains a 

performance-based process for 

approving the interstate movement of 

commodities that, based on the findings 

of a pest risk analysis, can be safely 

imported subject to one or more of the 

designated phytosanitary measures 

listed in paragraph (b) of that section. 

Under that process, APHIS publishes a 

notice in the Federal Register 

announcing the availability of the pest 

risk analysis that evaluates the risks 

associated with the interstate movement 

of a particular fruit or vegetable. 

Following the close of the 60-day 

comment period, APHIS may begin 

allowing the interstate movement of the 

fruit or vegetable subject to the 

identified designated measures if: (1) No 

comments were received on the pest 

risk analysis; (2) the comments on the 

pest risk analysis revealed that no 

changes to the pest risk analysis were 

necessary; or (3) changes to the pest risk 

analysis were made in response to 

public comments, but the changes did 

not affect the overall conclusions of the 

analysis and the Administrator’s 

determination of risk. 

In accordance with that process, we 

published a notice 1 in the Federal 

Register on June 16, 2011 (76 FR 35186– 

35187, Docket No. APHIS–2011–0037), 

in which we announced the availability, 

for review and comment, of a pest risk 

analysis that evaluates the risks 

associated with the interstate movement 

of rambutan fruit (Nephilium 

lappaceum L.) from Puerto Rico into the 

continental United States. We solicited 

comments on the notice for 60 days 

ending on August 15, 2011. We received 

no comments by that date. 

Therefore, in accordance with the 

regulations in 318.13–4, we are 

announcing our decision to begin 

allowing the interstate movement of 

rambutan from Puerto Rico into the 

continental United States subject to the 

following phytosanitary measures: 

• Inspection and certification by an 

inspector in Puerto Rico that the 

rambutan are free of all quarantine pests 

likely to follow the pathway of interstate 

movement of the rambutan; 

• Movement of the rambutan as 

commercial consignments only; and 

• Distribution of the rambutan only 

within a defined area (a prohibition on 

movement to Hawaii, the Virgin Islands, 

or Guam) and marking of the boxes or 

containers in which the rambutan is 

distributed to indicate those distribution 

restrictions. 

These conditions will be listed in the 

Puerto Rico Manual, found on the 

Internet at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ 

import_export/plants/manuals/ports/ 

downloads/puerto_rico.pdf. In addition 

to those specific measures, rambutan 

from Puerto Rico will be subject to the 

general requirements listed in 318.13–3 

that are applicable to the interstate 

movement of all fruits and vegetables 

from Puerto Rico. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781– 

7786; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3. 

Dated: Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd 

day of October 2011. 

Kevin Shea, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26050 Filed 10–6–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Credit Corporation 

Domestic Sugar Program—2011-Crop 

Cane Sugar and Beet Sugar Marketing 

Allotments and Company Allocations 

AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Credit 

Corporation (CCC) is issuing this notice 

to publish the fiscal year (FY) 2012 State 

sugar marketing allotments and 

company allocations to sugarcane and 

sugar beet processors, which apply to all 

domestic sugar marketed for human 

consumption in the United States from 

October 1, 2011, through September 30, 

2012. Although CCC already has 

announced most of the information in 

this notice through a United States 

Department of Agriculture (USDA) news 

release, CCC is required to publish the 

determinations establishing, adjusting, 

or suspending sugar marketing 

allotments in the Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Barbara Fecso, Dairy and Sweeteners 

Analysis Group, Economic and Policy 

Analysis Staff, Farm Service Agency, 

USDA, 1400 Independence Ave, SW., 

Mail Stop 0516, Washington, DC 20250– 

0516; telephone (202) 720–4146; FAX 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
62340 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Notices 

(202) 690–1480; e-mail: 

barbara.fecso@wdc.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

18, 2011, CCC announced the initial FY 

2012 overall sugar marketing allotment 

quantity (OAQ) of 9,456,250 short tons, 

raw value (STRV). The OAQ is equal to 

85 percent of the sugar for human 

consumption estimate for the crop year 

of 11,125,000 STRV as forecast in the 

July 2011 World Agricultural Supply 

and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report. 

The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 

1938, as amended, requires that the 

OAQ be set at not less than 85 percent 

of the estimated quantity of sugar for 

domestic human consumption for the 

crop year, and that a fixed portion of the 

OAQ be assigned to the beet sector and 

the cane sector. CCC distributed the FY 

2012 beet sugar allotment of 5,139,472 

STRV (54.35 percent of the OAQ) among 

the sugar beet processors and the cane 

sugar allotment of 4,316,778 STRV 

(45.65 percent of the OAQ) among the 

sugarcane processors. 

CCC determined that it was not 

necessary to establish farm level 

proportionate shares in Louisiana, the 

only State eligible for proportionate 

shares, in FY 2012. The cane sugar 

sector was not expected to fill its 

allotment and therefore, there was no 

need to limit sugarcane acreage in that 

State through proportionate shares. 

Additionally, CCC determined that the 

Feedstock Flexibility Program (FFP) will 

not be implemented in FY 2012 based 

on the forecast of limited sugar supplies 

and prices significantly above the 

support level. The probability of 

forfeitures of sugar loan collateral under 

CCC price support loans in FY 2012, 

which triggers FFP, was determined to 

be very low. 

The initial FY 2012 sugar marketing 

State allotments and processor 

allocations are listed in the following 

table: 

FY 2012 OVERALL BEET AND CANE ALLOTMENTS AND ALLOCATIONS

Distribution 

Initial FY 2012 

allocations 

STRV 

Beet Sugar ................................................................................................................................................................................... 5,139,472 

Cane Sugar .................................................................................................................................................................................. 4,316,778 

Total OAQ ............................................................................................................................................................................. 9,456,250 

Beet Processors’ Marketing Allocations: 

Amalgamated Sugar Co. ...................................................................................................................................................... 1,100,400 

American Crystal Sugar Co. ................................................................................................................................................. 1,889,666 

Michigan Sugar Co. .............................................................................................................................................................. 530,782 

Minn-Dak Farmers Co-op ..................................................................................................................................................... 356,931 

So. Minn Beet Sugar Co-op. ................................................................................................................................................ 693,665 

Western Sugar Co. ............................................................................................................................................................... 524,994 

Wyoming Sugar Growers, LLC ............................................................................................................................................ 43,034 

Total Beet Sugar ........................................................................................................................................................... 5,139,472 

State Cane Sugar Allotments: 

Florida ................................................................................................................................................................................... 2,148,906 

Louisiana .............................................................................................................................................................................. 1,662,420 

Texas .................................................................................................................................................................................... 186,808 

Hawaii ................................................................................................................................................................................... 318,664 

Total Cane Sugar .......................................................................................................................................................... 4,316,778 

Cane Processors’ Marketing Allocations: 

Florida: 

Florida Crystals ..................................................................................................................................................................... 884,761 

Growers Co-op of Florida ..................................................................................................................................................... 386,557 

U.S. Sugar Corp ................................................................................................................................................................... 877,588 

Total Florida .................................................................................................................................................................. 2,148,906 

Louisiana: 

Louisiana Sugar Cane Products, Inc. .................................................................................................................................. 1,154,105 

M.A. Patout & Sons .............................................................................................................................................................. 508,315 

Total Louisiana .............................................................................................................................................................. 1,662,420 

Texas: 

Rio Grande Valley ................................................................................................................................................................ 186,808 

Hawaii: 

Gay &Robinson, Inc. ............................................................................................................................................................ 73,145 

Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Company ............................................................................................................................ 245,499 

Total Hawaii ................................................................................................................................................................... 318,644 

* The sums of individual entries may not match totals due to rounding. 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Notices 62341 

Signed on September 30, 2011. 

Bruce Nelson, 

Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit 

Corporation. 

[FR Doc. 2011–25945 Filed 10–6–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Food and Nutrition Service 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request—School 

Foodservice Indirect Cost Study 

AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service 

(FNS), United States Department of 

Agriculture (USDA). 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 

notice invites the general public and 

other public agencies to comment on 

this proposed information collection. 

This collection is a new information 

collection for the School Foodservice 

Indirect Cost Study. 

DATES: Written comments on this notice 

must be received by December 6, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on: 

(a) Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of the burden of the proposed collection 

of information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions that 

were used; (c) ways to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (d) 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including use of 

appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

Comments may be sent to: John 

Endahl, Senior Program Analyst, Office 

of Research and Analysis, Food and 

Nutrition Service, USDA, 3101 Park 

Center Drive, Room 1004, Alexandria, 

VA 22302. Comments may also be 

submitted via fax to the attention of 

John Endahl at 703–305–2576 or via email to john.endahl@fns.usda.gov. 

Comments will also be accepted through 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, and follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments electronically. 

All responses to this notice will be 

summarized and included in the request 

for Office of Management and Budget 

approval. All comments will be a matter 

of public record. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

request more information on the 

proposed project or to obtain a copy of 

the data collection plans, contact John 

Endahl, Senior Program Analyst, Office 

of Research and Analysis, Food and 

Nutrition Service/USDA, 3101 Park 

Center Drive, Room 1004, Alexandria, 

VA 22302; Fax: 703–305–2576; E-mail: 

john.endahl@fns.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: School Foodservice Indirect 

Cost Study. 

OMB Number: 0584–NEW. 

Expiration Date of Approval: Not yet 

determined. 

Type of Information Collection 

Request: New information collection. 

Abstract: The Healthy Hunger Free 

Kids Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–296) 

requires USDA to conduct this study to 

assess the extent to which school food 

authorities (SFAs) participating in the 

National School Lunch and Breakfast 

Programs pay indirect costs. The 

objective of the School Foodservice 

Indirect Cost Study is to collect and 

analyze up-to-date data on school 

districts’ policies and procedures for 

reporting and recovering indirect costs 

attributable to their foodservice 

operations. 

The ultimate goal of this study is to 

provide USDA and Congress the 

necessary information to assess the 

extent to which school districts 

indentify, treat, and charge indirect 

costs attributable to their foodservice 

operations. Some focus will be placed 

on whether school districts treat 

indirect costs attributable to their food 

service operations the same way that 

they treat indirect costs attributable to 

other grant programs. The School Lunch 

and Breakfast Cost Studies conducted in 

the early 1990s and again in the mid 

2000s provide some evidence that as 

school district budgets have become 

increasingly tight, school districts have 

been increasingly likely to assess and 

recover indirect costs attributable to 

their food service operations. While this 

is permissible under USDA regulations, 

the regulations also stipulate that school 

districts must treat foodservice indirect 

costs in the same manner as their other 

grant programs. Previous research 

suggests that this is often not the case. 

This study will help FNS understand 

the extent to which current regulations 

are being followed and if there is a need 

for additional regulations and/or 

legislation to ensure that school districts 

treat indirect costs in the same manner 

across all of their grant programs. 

Specifically, this study will address the 

following questions: 

b What is the role of the State 

departments of education in 

establishing or approving school 

districts’ indirect cost rates? 

b Are the indirect costs charged or 

recovered by school districts from 

foodservice consistent with Federal and 

State allocation requirements? 

b What are the types and amounts of 

indirect costs charged and recovered by 

school districts from the foodservice 

account? 

b What are the types and amounts of 

indirect costs that school districts could, 

but do not, charge and recover from the 

foodservice account? 

b What is the impact of school 

districts charging and recovering 

indirect costs from the foodservice 

account on the ability of SFAs to 

operate on a break-even basis? 

The activities to be undertaken 

subject to this notice include: 

b Conducting a multi-modal (e.g. 

paper, Web, and telephone) survey of 

approximately 1,897 SFA Directors who 

will complete the survey out of 2,373 

recruited. 

b Conducting a multi-modal (e.g. 

paper, Web, and telephone) survey of 

approximately 1,897 School District 

Business Managers who will complete 

the survey out of 2,373 recruited. 

b Conducting a telephone survey of 

all 56 State Agency Child Nutrition 

Directors. 

b Conducting a telephone survey of 

all 56 State Agency Financial Officers. 

Affected Public: State and Local 

Governments. 

Type of Respondents: 2,373 SFA 

Directors, 2,373 School District Business 

Managers, 56 State Child Nutrition 

Directors, and 56 State Agency 

Financial Officers. 

Estimated Total Number of 

Respondents: 4,858. 

Frequency of Response: Once 

annually. 

Estimated Annual Responses: 4,858. 

Estimate of Time per Respondent and 

Annual Burden: Public reporting burden 

for this collection of information is 

estimated to average thirty (30) minutes 

per completed Self Administered 

Survey for the SFA Directors and sixty 

(60) minutes for the completed School 

District Business Managers. Reporting 

burden is estimated at thirty (30) 

minutes per completed telephone 

interview for the State Agency Child 

Nutrition Directors and sixty (60) 

minutes for the completed State Agency 

Financial Officer (this includes 30 

minutes for data gathering and 30 

minutes to respond to the interview). 

The initial sample in the School 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES