This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

10842 

Vol. 74, No. 48 

Friday, March 13, 2009 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Parts 1005 and 1007 

[Doc. Nos. AMS–DA–07–0133; AO–388–A15; 

AO–366–A44; DA–03–11–B] 

Milk in the Appalachian and Southeast 

Marketing Areas; Order To Terminate 

Proceeding on Proposed Amendments 

to Marketing Agreements and Orders 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Termination of proceeding. 

SUMMARY: This action terminates a 

rulemaking proceeding on two proposed 

amendments that sought to amend the 

producer-handler provisions of the 

Appalachian and Southeast milk 

marketing orders. Other proposed 

amendments considered as part of the 

rulemaking proceeding were addressed 

in previously issued decisions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gino M. Tosi, Order Formulation and 

Enforcement, USDA/AMS/Dairy 

Programs, STOP 0231–Room 2971, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20250–0231, (202) 690– 

1366, e-mail address: 

gino.tosi@ams.usda.gov, mail to: 

gino.tosi@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

administrative action is governed by the 

provisions of Sections 556 and 557 of 

Title 5 of the United States Code and, 

therefore, is excluded from the 

requirements of Executive Order 12866. 

This action terminates the rulemaking 

proceeding concerning proposed 

amendments to the producer-handler 

provisions of the Appalachian and 

Southeast orders. The proposals were 

considered at a public hearing held 

February 23–26, 2004. Other proposed 

amendments considered at the public 

hearing were addressed in a partial 

recommended decision issued May 13, 

2005, and published May 20, 2005 (70 

FR 29410), and a partial final decision 

issued September 15, 2005, and 

published September 21, 2005 (70 FR 

55458). A partial final rule was 

published October 12, 2005 (70 FR 

59221), making the amendments 

adopted in these decisions effective 

November 1, 2005. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act and 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

In accordance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), the 

Agricultural Marketing Service has 

considered the economic impact of this 

action on small entities and has certified 

that this rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. For the 

purpose of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, a dairy farm is considered a small 

business if it has an annual gross 

revenue of less than $750,000, and a 

dairy products manufacturer is a small 

business if it has fewer than 500 

employees. 

For the purposes of determining 

which dairy farms are small businesses, 

the $750,000 per year criterion was used 

to establish a production guideline of 

500,000 pounds per month. Although 

this guideline does not factor in 

additional monies that may be received 

by dairy producers, it should be an 

inclusive standard for most small dairy 

farmers. For purposes of determining a 

handler’s size, if the plant is part of a 

larger company operating multiple 

plants that collectively exceed the 500- 

employee limit, the plant will be 

considered a large business even if the 

local plant has fewer than 500 

employees. 

Producer-handlers are defined as 

dairy farmers that process only their 

own milk production. These entities 

must be dairy farmers as a pre-condition 

to operating processing plants as 

producer-handlers. The size of the dairy 

farm determines the production level of 

the operation and is the controlling 

factor in the capacity of the processing 

plant and possible sales volume 

associated with the producer-handler 

entity. Determining whether a producerhandler is considered a small or large 

business must depend on its capacity as 

a dairy farm where a producer-handler 

with annual gross revenue in excess of 

$750,000 is considered a large business. 

During February 2004, the month the 

hearing was held, the milk of 7,311 

dairy farmers was pooled on the 

Appalachian (Order 5) and Southeast 

(Order 7) milk orders (3,395 Order 5 

dairy farmers and 3,916 Order 7 dairy 

farmers). Of the total, 3,252 dairy 

farmers (or 96 percent) and 3,764 dairy 

farmers (or 96 percent) were considered 

small businesses on the Appalachian 

and Southeast orders, respectively. 

During February 2004, there were a 

total of 36 plants associated with the 

Appalachian order (25 fully regulated 

plants, 7 partially regulated plants, 1 

producer-handler, and 3 exempt plants) 

and a total of 51 plants associated with 

the Southeast order (32 fully regulated 

plants, 6 partially regulated plants, and 

13 exempt plants). The number of plants 

meeting the small business criteria 

under the Appalachian and Southeast 

orders were 13 (or 36 percent) and 13 

(or 25 percent), respectively. 

Two proposals that would amend the 

producer-handler provisions of the 

Appalachian and Southeast orders were 

considered at the public hearing. A 

proposal published in the hearing notice 

as Proposal 7 sought to apply the 

pooling and pricing provisions of the 

Southeast or Appalachian orders to 

producer-handlers with more than 3 

million pounds of fluid route 

disposition during the month. A dairy 

farmer who is a producer-handler with 

fluid route disposition above the 

proposed 3-million pounds per month 

threshold would be considered a ‘‘large’’ 

business. 

A second proposal published in the 

hearing notice as Proposal 8 sought to 

allow producer-handlers to purchase a 

limited amount of supplemental milk 

without losing their status as producerhandlers. As proposed, a producerhandler would be allowed to purchase 

up to 10 percent of the producer’s 

monthly milk production during the 

months of December through May, and 

30 percent during the months of June 

through November from other sources. 

Because this action terminates the 

rulemaking proceeding without 

amending the existing rules applicable 

to producer-handlers in the 

Appalachian and Southeast orders, the 

economic conditions of small entities 

remain unchanged. This action does not 

change reporting, record keeping, or 

other compliance requirements. 

Prior documents in this proceeding: 

Notice of Hearing: Issued January 16, 

2004; published January 23, 2004 (69 FR 

3278). 

Partial Recommended Decision: 

Issued May 13, 2005; published May 20, 

2005 (70 FR 29410). 


yshivers on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 48 / Friday, March 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules 10843 

Partial Final Decision: Issued 

September 15, 2005; published 

September 21, 2005 (70 FR 55458). 

Partial Final Rule: Issued October 7, 

2005; published October 12, 2005 (70 

FR 59221). 

Preliminary Statement 

A public hearing was held upon 

proposed amendments to the marketing 

agreements and orders regulating the 

handling of milk in the Appalachian 

and Southeast marketing areas. The 

hearing was held, pursuant to the 

provisions of the Agricultural Marketing 

Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 

U.S.C. 601–674), and the applicable 

rules of practice and procedure 

governing the formulation of marketing 

agreements and marketing orders (7 CFR 

part 900), at Atlanta, Georgia, on 

February 23–26, 2004, pursuant to a 

notice of hearing issued January 16, 

2004, and published in the Federal 

Register on January 20, 2004 (69 FR 

3278). 

Producer-Handler Provisions 

This action terminates the rulemaking 

proceeding concerning proposed 

amendments to the producer-handler 

provisions of the Appalachian and 

Southeast orders. A proposal published 

in the hearing notice as Proposal 7 

sought to apply the Appalachian and 

Southeast orders’ pooling and pricing 

provisions to producer-handlers with 

fluid route disposition in excess of 3 

million pounds per month. A second 

proposal, published in the hearing 

notice as Proposal 8, sought to allow 

producer-handlers to purchase up to 10 

percent of the producer’s monthly milk 

production during December through 

May and 30 percent during June through 

November from other sources. 

The Appalachian and the Southeast 

milk orders provide identical 

definitions that describe and define a 

category of handlers known as 

producer-handlers. Both orders require 

producer-handlers to operate their 

businesses at their own enterprise and 

risk, meaning that the care and 

management of the dairy animals and 

other resources necessary for the 

production, processing, and distribution 

of fluid milk products are the sole 

responsibility of the handler. 

The Appalachian and Southeast 

orders prohibit producer-handlers from 

purchasing any amount of supplemental 

milk from pool sources or from any 

other source. Producer-handlers bear the 

entire burden of balancing their own 

milk production. Any fluctuation in a 

producer-handler’s daily and seasonal 

milk needs must be met through their 

own farm production and any excess 

milk supplies must be disposed of at 

their own expense. 

Producer-handlers are exempt from 

the pooling and pricing provisions of 

the Appalachian and Southeast orders. 

Exemption from the pooling and pricing 

provisions of the orders means that the 

minimum class prices established under 

the orders that handlers must pay for 

milk are not applicable to producerhandlers, and producer-handlers receive 

no minimum price protection for their 

milk production not disposed of for 

fluid uses. 

While producer-handlers are exempt 

from the pooling and pricing provisions 

of the Appalachian and Southeast 

orders, they are required to submit 

reports to the Market Administrator who 

monitors producer-handler operations 

to ensure that they are in compliance 

with the conditions for such exemption 

status. 

The Secretary is in the process of 

receiving proposals to initiate a new 

rulemaking proceeding to consider the 

elimination of the producer-handler 

provision in all Federal milk marketing 

orders. Two such proposals have been 

received and the Secretary has invited 

the submission of additional proposals. 

Such proposals must be received by 

Dairy Programs by March 16, 2009. (See 

Dairy Programs Web site at http:// 

www.ams.usda.gov/dairy.) 

Given this development and the 

substance of the two proposals 

considered herein, the review of the 

producer-handler exemption under all 

Federal milk marketing orders would be 

a more comprehensive review. 

Therefore, the Secretary has determined 

that this rulemaking proceeding should 

be terminated. 

Termination of Proceeding 

In view of the foregoing, it is hereby 

determined that the proceeding with 

respect to proposed amendments to the 

Appalachian and Southeast orders 

regarding the regulation of producerhandlers should be and is hereby 

terminated. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Parts 1005 and 

1007 

Milk marketing orders. 

The authority citation for 7 CFR Parts 

1005 and 1007 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674, and 7253. 

Dated: March 9, 2009. 

Robert C. Keeney, 

Acting Associate Administrator. 

[FR Doc. E9–5414 Filed 3–12–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 320 

RIN 3084-AA99 

Disclosures for Non-Federally Insured 

Depository Institutions under the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 

Improvement Act (FDICIA) 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission 

(FTC or Commission). 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking; request for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Deposit 

Insurance Corporation Improvement Act 

of 1991 (FDICIA) directs the 

Commission to prescribe the manner 

and content of certain mandatory 

disclosures for depository institutions 

that lack federal deposit insurance. On 

March 16, 2005, the Commission 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) seeking comment 

on disclosure rules for such institutions. 

Subsequently, Congress passed the 

Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act 

of 2006 (FSRRA), which amended 

FDICIA’s requirements. To ensure that 

the FTC’s requirements are consistent 

with the FSRRA amendments, the 

Commission is seeking comment on 

conforming changes to the proposed 

Rule. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before June 5, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments 

electronically or in paper form. 

Comments should refer to 

‘‘Supplemental Proposed Rule for 

FDICIA Disclosures, Matter No. 

R411014’’ to facilitate the organization 

of comments. Please note that comments 

will be placed on the public record of 

this proceeding—including on the 

publicly accessible FTC website, at 

(http://www.ftc.gov/os/ 

publiccomments.shtm) — and therefore 

should not include any sensitive or 

confidential information. In particular, 

comments should not include any 

sensitive personal information, such as 

an individual’s Social Security Number; 

date of birth; driver’s license number or 

other state identification number, or 

foreign country equivalent; passport 

number; financial account number; or 

credit or debit card number. Comments 

also should not include any sensitive 

health information, such as medical 

records or other individually 

identifiable health information. In 

addition, comments should not include 

any ‘‘[t]rade secrets and commercial or 

financial information obtained from a 


yshivers on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS