This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

19925 

Vol. 77, No. 64 

Tuesday, April 3, 2012 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Credit Corporation 

7 CFR Part 1427 

RIN 0560–AI16 

Upland Cotton Base Quality 

AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation 

and Farm Service Agency, USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule makes technical 

changes to the Commodity Credit 

Corporation (CCC) upland cotton 

marketing assistance loan (MAL) 

regulations to revise certain grade and 

quality references. Changes include 

revising references to specific quality 

characteristics of certain base quality 

grades to simply a reference to the ‘‘base 

quality’’ of the grade without further 

specification. CCC uses base quality to 

calculate upland cotton loan rates, 

Adjusted World Price (AWP), and 

related adjustments. This change will 

accommodate any future changes to the 

base quality specifications that define 

the base quality characteristics of a 

particular grade. This rule also changes 

a broad reference of a base grade to a 

more specific reference that names the 

particular relevant grade. None of these 

changes involve a change of policy and 

would not have affected any program 

determinations in past crop years, had 

these changes been in place at the time. 

They improve the regulations by 

maintaining consistency with base 

quality specifications as that may 

change in the future. This amendment 

will apply starting with the 2012 crop. 

DATES: Effective date: April 3, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gene Rosera, Economic and Policy 

Analysis Staff, FSA; telephone (202) 

720–8837, email: 

gene.rosera@wdc.usda.gov. Persons 

with disabilities who require alternative 

means for communications (Braille, 

large print, audio tape, etc.) should 

contact the USDA Target Center at (202) 

720–2600 (voice and TDD). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Farm Service Agency (FSA) 

operates an upland cotton MAL program 

for upland cotton using CCC funds. The 

base quality loan rate is set in section 

1201 of the Food, Conservation, and 

Energy Act of 2008 (the 2008 Farm Bill, 

Pub. L. 110–246) at 52 cents a pound for 

the 2008 through 2012 crop years. Loan 

rates for individual bales depend on the 

grade of the cotton and the quality 

within the grade. The grades referenced 

in this rule are Middling (M), Strict 

Middling (SM), and Strict Low Middling 

(SLM). The loan schedule provides a 

base grade that produces a loan rate of 

52 cents per pound at base quality. That 

base grade is SLM 11⁄16-inch, leaf 4 

cotton. Producers can either forfeit the 

cotton in satisfaction of the loan or 

repay the loan at a rate that is based, 

generally, on a calculated AWP. 

Repayment rates are adjusted, like the 

loan rates themselves, based on grade 

and quality within the grade. FSA uses 

measures of strength and length 

uniformity in determining the price 

support value of a bale of upland cotton. 

The base-quality ranges for these factors 

are those for which loan rate premiums 

and discounts do not apply. The 

calculations specified in § 1427.25(c)(2) 

are used to make an overall adjustment 

in basic repayment rates for cotton loans 

while § 1427.25(e)(2)(ii) and (f)(2)(ii) are 

directed at coarse count and fine count 

adjustments, respectively, in the 

repayment rates for certain cotton 

grades. 

Prior to this rule, the cotton 

regulations specified in 7 CFR part 1427 

that various AWP adjustments be made 

based on comparisons between certain 

loan rates for base qualities of certain 

grades. However, rather than simply 

refer to the ‘‘base quality’’ those specific 

qualities of the base grade (micronaire, 

length uniformity, and strength) are 

stated in the rules. That specificity 

creates technical problems if the loan 

schedules and base grade specifications 

are changed. CCC establishes upland 

cotton base quality ranges 

administratively, based in part on the 

ranges reported by the cotton industry 

to the USDA Agricultural Marketing 

Service (AMS). AMS can and does 

change the specification of ‘‘base 

quality’’ cotton in response to observed 

market valuation of quality attributes. 

By replacing the specific ranges with the 

term ‘‘base quality,’’ CCC’s use of the 

term in the regulation remains 

consistent with AMS in the future. 

Prior to this rule, § 1427.25(c) made 

an adjustment, ‘‘between the applicable 

loan rate for an upland cotton crop for 

M 13⁄32-inch, leaf 3, (micronaire 3.5 

through 3.6 and 4.3 through 4.9, 

strength 25.5 through 29.4 grams per 

tex, length uniformity 79.5 through 82.4 

percent) cotton and the loan rate for 

base quality upland cotton.’’ This rule 

addresses, first, the specification in 

§ 1427.25(c)(2) regarding the references 

to M 13⁄32-inch, leaf 3. This rule 

eliminates the base quality 

specifications in the regulation 

(micronaire 3.5 through 3.6 and 4.3 

through 4.9, etc.). The text regarding 

that grade is being changed to simply 

refer to ‘‘base quality M 13⁄32-inch, leaf 

3.’’ Should the specifications for base 

quality for ‘‘M 13⁄32-inch, leaf 3’’ change 

in the future, there will be no need to 

change the regulations. 

Second, this rule makes another 

change to § 1427.25(c)(2). The regulation 

as quoted above refers to comparing the 

applicable ‘‘M 13⁄32-inch, leaf 3’’ loan 

rate to ‘‘the loan rate for base quality 

upland cotton.’’ That reference in 

§ 1427.25(c)(2) to ‘‘base quality upland 

cotton’’ is to the base grade for upland 

cotton MALs—as noted above—namely, 

base quality SLM 11⁄16-inch, leaf 4 

cotton. So that the regulations may be 

specific and not create confusion with 

the ‘‘base quality’’ references that are 

being added with respect to other 

grades, this rule changes the reference 

in § 1427.25(c)(2) to ‘‘base quality 

upland cotton’’ to a specific reference to 

‘‘base quality SLM 11⁄16-inch, leaf 4 

cotton.’’ With these two changes, the 

regulations in § 1427.25(c)(2) will 

provide for a comparison ‘‘between the 

applicable loan rate for an upland 

cotton crop for base quality M 13⁄32- 

inch, leaf 3 cotton and the loan rate for 

an upland cotton crop for base quality 

SLM 11⁄32-inch, leaf 4 cotton.’’ Had that 

language been in place in 2011, there 

would have been no change in adjusted 

price determinations specified in 

§ 1427.25(c)(2). The same will be true in 

2012 and thereafter if there is no change 

to the base quality specifications for the 

‘‘M 13⁄32-inch, leaf 3’’ and ‘‘SLM 11⁄32- 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
19926 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

inch, leaf 4’’ grades. But if there are 

changes, then no conforming adjustment 

in the regulations will be needed since 

the changes in the base quality 

specifications would be incorporated, in 

effect, by the generic reference to the 

‘‘base quality’’ of those two grades. The 

base qualities of the grades will be 

whatever the standards current at that 

time specify. 

Similarly, in § 1427.25(e)(2)(ii) and 

(f)(ii) of the regulations there are other 

references to the ‘‘M 13⁄32-inch, leaf 3’’ 

grade like the one to that grade in 

§ 1427.25(c)(2)—that is, with the 

specific qualities of the base grade set 

out. There are also similar references 

with similar specificity regarding the 

grade ‘‘SLM 11⁄32-inch, leaf 4’’ in 

§ 1427.25(e)(2)(ii) and grade ‘‘SM 11⁄8- 

inch, leaf 2’’ in § 1427.25 (f)(2)(ii). As 

with the change regarding grade 

‘‘M 13⁄32-inch, leaf 3’’ in § 1427.25(c)(2), 

the references to base quality for that 

grade and the other grades 

§ 1427.25(e)(2)(ii) and (f)(2)(ii) are 

modified to replace the specification for 

base quality with a reference to the use 

of the ‘‘base quality’’ grade in the 

comparison (whatever those 

specifications have been). Therefore, 

this rule changes the reference in 

§ 1427.25(e)(2)(ii) to a comparison 

‘‘between the applicable loan rate for an 

upland cotton crop for M 13⁄32-inch, leaf 

3, (micronaire 3.5 through 3.6 and 4.3 

through 4.9, strength 25.5 through 29.4 

grams per tex, length uniformity 80 

through 82 percent) cotton and the loan 

rate for an upland cotton crop for SLM 

11⁄32-inch, leaf 4, (micronaire 3.5 

through 3.6 and 4.3 through 4.9, 

strength 25.5 through 29.4 grams per 

tex, length uniformity 79.5 through 82.4 

percent) cotton’’ to a comparison 

‘‘between the applicable loan rate for an 

upland cotton crop for base quality M 

13⁄32-inch, leaf 3 cotton and the loan rate 

for an upland cotton crop for base 

quality SLM 11⁄32-inch, leaf 4 cotton.’’ 

Likewise, this rule changes the 

comparison in § 1427.25(f)(2)(ii) from a 

comparison ‘‘between the applicable 

loan rate for an upland cotton crop for 

M 13⁄32-inch, leaf 3, (micronaire 3.5 

through 3.6 and 4.3 through 4.9, 

strength 25.5 through 29.4 grams per 

tex, length uniformity 79.5 through 82.4 

percent) cotton and the loan rate for an 

upland cotton crop for SM 11⁄8-inch, leaf 

2, (micronaire 3.5 through 3.6 and 4.3 

through 4.9, strength 25.5 through 29.4 

grams per tex, length uniformity 79.5 

through 82.4 percent) cotton’’ to specify 

that it is a comparison ‘‘between the 

applicable loan rate for an upland 

cotton crop for base quality M 13⁄32- 

inch, leaf 3 cotton and the loan rate for 

an upland cotton crop for base quality 

SM 11⁄8-inch, leaf 2 cotton.’’ 

Neither of these changes in 

§ 1427.25(e)(2)(ii) and (f)(2)(ii) would 

have affected, had they been in place 

earlier, previous determinations of loan 

repayment rates. However like the 

§ 1427.25(c)(2) changes, these changes 

accommodate future changes in what 

constitutes ‘‘base quality’’ in the specific 

grades listed there. 

Notice and Comment 

These regulations are exempt from the 

notice and comment requirements of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

553), as specified in section 1601(c)(2) 

of the 2008 Farm Bill, which requires 

that the regulations to implement Title 

I of the 2008 Farm Bill be promulgated 

and administered without regard to the 

notice and comment provisions of 5 

U.S.C. 553 or the Statement of Policy of 

the Secretary of Agriculture effective 

July 24, 1971 (36 FR 13804) relating to 

notices of proposed rulemaking and 

public participation in rulemaking. 

Also, this rule is technical in nature, not 

substantive, and a delay in 

implementing this rule would be 

contrary to the public interest. 

Executive Order 12866 and 13563 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review,’’ and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review,’’ direct agencies 

to assess all costs and benefits of 

available regulatory alternatives and, if 

regulation is necessary, to select 

regulatory approaches that maximize 

net benefits (including potential 

economic, environmental, public health 

and safety effects, distributive impacts, 

and equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasized the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits, of 

reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, 

and of promoting flexibility. 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) designated this rule as not 

significant under Executive Order 

12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review,’’ and therefore has not 

reviewed this rule. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), as amended by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to the notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

553) or any other statute, unless the 

agency certifies that the rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This rule is not subject to the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act because CCC is not 

required to publish a notice of proposed 

rulemaking for this rule. 

Environmental Review 

The environmental impacts of this 

rule have been considered in a manner 

consistent with the provisions of the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321–4347), the 

regulations of the Council on 

Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 

1500–1508), and FSA regulations for 

compliance with NEPA (7 CFR part 

799). The technical corrections 

identified in this final rule do not 

change the structure or goals of the 

program and can be considered simply 

administrative in nature. Therefore, FSA 

has determined that NEPA does not 

apply to this final rule and no 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement will be 

prepared. 

Executive Order 12372 

This program is not subject to 

Executive Order 12372, 

‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs,’’ which requires consultation 

with State and local officials. See the 

notice related to 7 CFR part 3015, 

subpart V, published in the Federal 

Register on June 24, 1983 (48 FR 29115). 

Executive Order 12988 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice 

Reform.’’ The provisions of this rule 

will not have preemptive effect with 

respect to any State or local laws, 

regulations, or policies that conflict 

with such provision or which otherwise 

impede their full implementation. The 

rule will not have retroactive effect. 

Before any judicial action may be 

brought regarding this rule, all 

administrative remedies must be 

exhausted. 

Executive Order 13132 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism.’’ 

The policies contained in this rule 

would not have any substantial direct 

effect on States, the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

the States, or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Nor would this 

rule impose substantial direct 

compliance costs on State and local 

governments. Therefore, consultation 

with the States is not required. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 19927 

Executive Order 13175 

This rule has been reviewed for 

compliance with Executive Order 

13175, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments.’’ 

Executive Order 13175 imposes 

requirements on the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications or preempt tribal laws. The 

policies contained in this rule do not 

preempt Tribal law. USDA continues to 

consult with Tribal officials to have a 

meaningful consultation and 

collaboration on the development and 

strengthening of USDA regulations. 

Unfunded Mandates 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA, Pub. L. 

104–4) requires Federal agencies to 

assess the effects of their regulatory 

actions on State, local, and Tribal 

governments or the private sector. 

Agencies generally must prepare a 

written statement, including a cost 

benefit analysis, for proposed and final 

rules with Federal mandates that may 

result in expenditures of $100 million or 

more in any 1 year for State, local, or 

Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

to the private sector. UMRA generally 

requires agencies to consider 

alternatives and adopt the more cost 

effective or least burdensome alternative 

that achieves the objectives of the rule. 

This rule contains no Federal mandates, 

as defined under title II of the UMRA, 

for State, local, and Tribal governments 

or the private sector. Therefore, this rule 

is not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 and 205 of UMRA. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

OMB has designated this rule as not 

significant. As a result, this rule is not 

considered a major rule under SBREFA 

and FSA is not required to delay the 

effective date for 60 days from the date 

of publication to allow for 

Congressional review. Accordingly, this 

rule is effective on the date of 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Federal Assistance Programs 

The title and number of the Federal 

assistance program in the Catalog of 

Domestic Federal Assistance to which 

this rule will apply is Commodity Loan 

and Loan Deficiency Payments—10.051. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The regulations in this rule are 

exempt from the requirements of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35), as specified in section 

1601(c)(2) of the 2008 Farm Bill, which 

provides that these regulations be 

promulgated and administered without 

regard to the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

E-Government Act Compliance 

CCC is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the Internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government Information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1427 

Cotton, Cottonseeds, Loan programs— 

agriculture, Packaging and containers, 

Price support programs, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Surety 

bonds, Warehouses. 

For the reasons discussed above, this 

rule amends 7 CFR part 1427 as follows: 

PART 1427—COTTON 

■ 1. The authority for part 1427 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7231–7236 and 8737; 

and 15 U.S.C. 714b, and 714c. 

■ 2. Amend § 1427.25 by revising 

paragraphs (c)(2), (e)(2)(ii), and (f)(2)(ii) 

to read as follows: 

§ 1427.25 Determination of the prevailing 

world market price and the adjusted world 

price for upland cotton. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) The price determined as specified 

in paragraph (c)(1) of this section will be 

adjusted to reflect the price of base 

quality upland cotton by deducting the 

difference, as CCC announces, between 

the applicable loan rate for an upland 

cotton crop for base quality M 13⁄32- 

inch, leaf 3 cotton and the loan rate for 

base quality SLM 11⁄16-inch, leaf 4 

cotton. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) The difference between the 

applicable loan rate for an upland 

cotton crop for base quality M 13⁄32- 

inch, leaf 3 cotton and the loan rate for 

an upland cotton crop for base quality 

SLM 11⁄32-inch, leaf 4 cotton. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) The difference between the 

applicable loan rate for an upland 

cotton crop for base quality M 13⁄32- 

inch, leaf 3 cotton and the loan rate for 

an upland cotton crop for base quality 

SM 11⁄8-inch, leaf 2 cotton. 

* * * * * 

Signed on March 28, 2012. 

Bruce Nelson, 

Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit 

Corporation. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7990 Filed 4–2–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–1314; Airspace 

Docket No. 11–AWP–18] 

Amendment of Class E Airspace; 

Willcox, AZ, and Revocation of Class E 

Airspace; Cochise, AZ 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E 

airspace at Willcox, AZ, and removes 

Class E airspace at Cochise, AZ. The 

airspace designation listed as Cochise, 

AZ, is combined with Cochise County 

Airport, Willcox, AZ. Controlled 

airspace is necessary to accommodate 

aircraft using Area Navigation (RNAV) 

Global Positioning System (GPS) 

standard instrument approach 

procedures at Cochise County Airport, 

Willcox, AZ. Decommissioning of the 

Cochise VHF Omni-Directional Radio 

Range Tactical Air Navigation Aid 

(VORTAC) has made this action 

necessary for the safety and 

management of aircraft operations at the 

airport. 

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, May 

31, 2012. The Director of the Federal 

Register approves this incorporation by 

reference action under 1 CFR Part 51, 

subject to the annual revision of FAA 

Order 7400.9 and publication of 

conforming amendments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Operations Support 

Group, Western Service Center, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; 

telephone (425) 203–4537. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On January 10, 2012, the FAA 

published in the Federal Register a 

notice of proposed rulemaking to amend 

controlled airspace at Willcox, AZ, and 

remove the controlled airspace 

designation at Cochise, AZ (77 FR 

1428). Interested parties were invited to 

participate in this rulemaking effort by 

submitting written comments on the 

proposal to the FAA. One comment was 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES